Issues

Issue 1-1 | July 2013

Issue 1-2 | Jan 2014

Issue 2-1 | July 2014

Issue 2-2 | February 2015

Issue 3-1 | July 2015

Issue 3-2 | February 2016

Issue 4-1 | July 2016

Issue 4-2 | February 2017

Issue 5-1 | July 2017

Issue 5-2 | February 2018

Submission Policy


Archidoct is published two times a year, in July and February. The official language of the journal is English. Submitted manuscripts for review should not exceed 4500 words, including abstracts, references and image captions. The referring system will be the Harvard System. Text should be saved in a Microsoft Word or RTF file, while the supporting visual material (images, diagrams, sketches, tables and so on) should be sent as TIFF files with a resolution of at least 300 dpi. All visual material should be clearly indicated and numbered in the text, along with the respective image captions and credits. Additionally, all manuscripts should be submitted in A4 ”camera-ready” .pdf format that gives an idea of what a finalized version looks like.

Archidoct only accepts manuscripts from PhD students. In order for an article submission to be considered for publication, the student must be a registered and active member of the ENHSA Observatory (www.enhsa.net/main/observatory), a PhD research portal created to facilitate communication and meaningful information exchange between architecture doctoral students.

Reviewing Policy

The peer reviewers are all confirmed educators of architecture coming from different educational backgrounds, with different specialisations and expertise that share the common interest of their doctoral students: to encourage them to publish their work while improving their thinking processes towards academic research writings. Each submitted article is reviewed by two members of the journal’s Scientific Committee anonymously.

Copyright Policy

The ArchiDoct journal is offered in a downloadable form for academic and research purposes only. All material published in each issue is, unless otherwise stated, the property of the authors of the respective articles. The reproduction of an article in whole is only allowed with the written consent of the author. Any reproduction of the material in parts, in any manner, should properly credit the copyright holder. A single copy of the materials available in each issue may be made for personal, noncommercial use.

For all enquiries, requests and contributions please contact: archidoct@enhsa.net

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Duties of editors

Fair play and editorial independence

Manuscripts are exclusively evaluated according to their relevance to the journal’s scope and the originality, clarity, importance and validity of the study/work. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by any governmental bodies, institutions or other agencies outside the journal itself.

Confidentiality

Information about a submitted manuscript will only be disclosed as appropriate by editors and the editorial staff to the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors and the publisher.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships/connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers; instead they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage.

Publication decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewer’s comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding copyright and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Responsive measures will be taken in the event that ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published article. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with authors, may also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Disclosures and conflicts of interest

If an invited referee feels unqualified to review a given piece of research or will not be able to respond in a timely manner, he/she should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review, so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Declining an invitation to review a manuscript also applies in the event that the invited referees have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the manuscript or work described therein.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such and not shown or discussed with others. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline invitations.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving their manuscripts.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by a relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Duties of authors

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit a manuscript that has already been published in another journal.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only authors who made a significant contribution to the manuscript should be named as authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are listed in the publication and have agreed to its submission and to the publication of the final version of the manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Any possible conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and that they have cited all publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures are performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that appropriate institutional committees have approved them. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.

Peer review

Authors are obliged to participate in peer reviews and cooperate fully by responding to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications and proof of ethics approval and copyright permissions. In the event of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the stated deadline.

Fundamental errors in published work

If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or retract the paper.

Duties of the publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

In the event of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the timely publication of an erratum or clarification or, in the most severe cases, the retraction of the affected work.

Access to journal content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organisations and maintaining a digital archive.