On this page
Initial Manuscript Screening
All submissions to Ingegneria Sismica undergo a two-tier preliminary assessment. First, our Managing Editor conducts a technical check to ensure the submission conforms to the journal’s scope, adheres to ethical publishing practices, and meets the basic quality standards. This includes verifying formatting, references, data transparency, and author disclosures.
Following this, an academic editor (which may be the Editor-in-Chief, a Guest Editor for special issues, or an Editorial Board member) evaluates the scientific merit, relevance to the journal’s aims, and methodological soundness. At this stage, the editor may recommend one of the following actions: proceed to external peer review, request revisions prior to review, or reject the submission. In cases of editorial conflict of interest, another unbiased board member is assigned.
Peer Review Protocol
Manuscripts that pass pre-check enter the formal peer review process, managed by an assigned editorial staff member who coordinates communication among reviewers, editors, and authors.
Most submissions to Ingegneria Sismica follow a single-blind review process. In some cases, double-blind review may be used depending on the section or article type. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent experts. Reviewers are selected based on qualifications, publication history, and absence of conflicts of interest. Authors may suggest reviewers or list individuals they wish to exclude; all suggestions are considered but not guaranteed.
Reviewers must:
Not share institutional affiliations with any authors;
Not have co-authored with any authors in the past three years;
Hold a PhD (or equivalent);
Demonstrate relevant subject expertise via Scopus or ORCID profiles;
Provide objective, ethical, and timely assessments.
Reviewers are typically given 7–10 days to submit their evaluations. Extensions may be granted upon request. Revised submissions should be re-evaluated within 3 days, especially if significant revisions were previously requested.
Revision and Resubmission
If a manuscript requires changes, authors are notified with detailed reviewer comments. Editorial staff manage the revision cycle, and academic editors are consulted when reports are conflicting or when rejection is recommended. In general, a maximum of two major revision rounds are allowed.
If extensive revision is needed, the manuscript may be rejected with an invitation to resubmit. Resubmitted versions are assigned a new ID and linked to the previous version. The same reviewers are re-invited to ensure consistency in evaluation.
Failure to respond to revision requests within the specified timeline may result in withdrawal of the manuscript.
Editorial Decisions
Final decisions are made by the assigned academic editor after considering reviewer feedback, the authors’ responses, and the overall scientific quality. Options include:
Accept as-is;
Accept with minor revisions;
Request major revisions;
Reject with resubmission allowed;
Reject outright.
In rare cases where the academic editor’s decision diverges from reviewer recommendations, a second opinion is requested from another board member to ensure fairness. Only academic editors can approve manuscripts for publication; Ingegneria Sismica staff do not influence these decisions.
Editors and editorial staff must declare any potential conflict of interest and are prohibited from handling their own manuscripts. Such submissions are reviewed independently to preserve objectivity.
Appeals
Authors who disagree with a rejection may file an appeal within three months, accompanied by a detailed rebuttal and point-by-point response. Appeals are reviewed by an Editorial Board Member uninvolved in the original decision, and the final judgment is validated by the Editor-in-Chief. Decisions post-appeal are final.
Production Process
Accepted manuscripts undergo professional editing, typesetting, and proofreading by Ingegneria Sismica’s production team. Minor corrections to language and layout are allowed post-acceptance. Substantial post-acceptance changes require editorial approval and may delay publication.
Ethics and Integrity
Ingegneria Sismica adheres to COPE standards and promotes ethical publishing practices. Plagiarism checks are performed using industry-standard tools such as iThenticate. Ethical issues raised during or after review are investigated according to COPE guidelines. Authorship disputes require institutional verification.
We follow recognized international guidelines including:
ICMJE (authorship and disclosures);
CONSORT (clinical trials);
PRISMA (systematic reviews);
TOP (transparency);
FAIR principles (data management);
ARRIVE (in vivo studies).
Editorial Independence
All editorial decisions are made independently by the assigned editors without interference from journal staff. The evaluation focuses on reviewer selection, the appropriateness of peer feedback, and the scientific value of the manuscript.
The mission of Ingegneria Sismica is to provide open and equitable access to high-quality research, with every manuscript evaluated solely on merit and scholarly contribution. Citation manipulation, coercive referencing, or unethical editorial practices are strictly prohibited.