qwqmiku 2023-07-25

I previously submitted a post for about 4-5 months, looking for reviewers and undergoing the review process. It's not that quick.

Passion-J 2023-07-24

So slow! It took nearly three months to find the reviewer.

qwqmiku 2023-07-22

Invited to review after a year, I felt very curious. Before reading, I wanted to give some encouragement for minor revisions, but after reading it, I found that there were too many issues and suggested major revisions. In the end, the manuscript was still rejected (due to the rejection from the other two reviewers). I also worried that my wording might be too sharp, but after reading the opinions of other reviewers, I felt that I was still too young... _(:з」∠)_

Here are a few selected opinions:

Reviewer 1 (raised 8 questions): The abstract quality is very poor. Originality is not apparent. No explanation on why this model was used, and so on. The writing is too long. A serious rejection.

Reviewer 2 (only three lines): No listing, overall, the literature review, data processing, and significance analysis are all inadequate. Suggest rewriting. (_(:з」∠)_)

The following points were mentioned and need attention:
1. The literature review should be systematic.
2. Originality and innovation, or significance, are necessary.
3. The abstract needs to be well-written.
4. Data processing and analysis are crucial.

Wishing everyone success in their papers! ＼(`Δ')／

Passion-J 2023-06-27

It has been more than two months and still looking for reviewers...

爱祖国 2023-06-16

"May I ask if your condition has changed?"

爱祖国 2023-05-18

May I ask if this journal requires page charges?

lion kiss deer 2023-04-17

Is the layout fee more than three thousand dollars? It's so expensive.

yy的 2023-03-14

When will you enter the next stage?

yy的 2023-03-14

It has been a week and the situation has not changed.

mona 2022-11-29

May I ask where can I find a template for this journal? I have been searching for it but couldn't find it.

qwqmiku 2022-05-22

Update: received on May 22nd. Submitted the manuscript on September 10th. The entire cycle took approximately 8 months.

走过路过 2022-04-21

Invited to review for the second time, and the deadline given was three weeks. Unable to see any information about the author, received a reminder email in the third week.

PHOENix618 2022-01-08

This journal's impact factor has significantly increased in the past two years, presumably due to an increase in the number of submissions, resulting in slow processing time. However, fortunately, the editors have a good attitude, and the opinions raised by the reviewers are also very fair. Those who are not in a hurry can give it a try, but if you're in a hurry, be cautious when submitting. In any case, I still hope that this journal will continue to improve!

Sharing my submission process:

2021-04-12: Submitted
2021-04-22: Passed initial screening and is now awaiting reviewer selection
---- Afterward, it was a long process of finding reviewers and reviewing----
2021-10-16: Major Revision
2021-10-27: A revision has been submitted
2021-12-04: Major Revision
2021-12-09: A revision has been submitted
2022-01-07: Accepted

示在耳边 2021-12-29

It has been almost a week since the submission, but it is still "Awaiting EA Checklist." For this journal, do all authors still need to confirm via email? The corresponding author is concerned that the confirmation email for the correspondence might have been forgotten by the boss.

CC必中 2021-12-13

I also applied in September, but there has been no news or updates since then. My situation hasn't changed at all. I'm getting anxious because I want to graduate. What should I do?

qwqmiku 2021-12-13

September submission and now it's December, still looking for reviewers... I give up. All this time wasted, that's what I'm saying.

走过路过 2021-03-01

Assignments:

DE: Asadi, Somayeh

EIC: Anumba, Chimay

EA: Smith, Nancy

走过路过 2021-03-01

Question 5, the latter part: What is the impact on society (influencing public attitudes, affecting quality of life)? Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the paper?

走过路过 2021-03-01

5. Implications for research, practice, and/or society: Does the paper clearly identify any implications for research, practice, and/or society? Does the paper successfully bridge the gap between theory and practice? How can the research findings be applied in practice to have economic and commercial impact? How can it be used in teaching to influence public policy? How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge in research?

走过路过 2021-03-01

6. Quality of Communication: Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the fields and the expected knowledge of the journal's readership? Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc.

Translation:

6. Quality of Communication: Does the paper effectively convey its argument, considering the technical terminology used in the respective fields and the assumed knowledge level of the journal's readers? Is there a focus on ensuring clarity in expression and readability, including sentence structure, use of specialized vocabulary, acronyms, etc.

走过路过 2021-03-01

3. Methodology: Is the paper's argument built on an appropriate base of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work on which the paper is based been well designed? Are the methods employed appropriate?

4. Results: Are results presented clearly and analyzed appropriately? Do the conclusions adequately tie together the other elements of the paper?

Translation:

3. Methodology: Does the paper's argument rely on a suitable foundation of theory, concepts, or other ideas? Has the research or equivalent intellectual work, on which the paper is based, been well planned? Are the methods used appropriate?

4. Results: Are the results presented clearly and analyzed appropriately? Do the conclusions sufficiently connect the other aspects of the paper?

走过路过 2021-03-01

Reviewers should answer the following 6 questions:
1. Originality: Does the paper present new and important information that justifies its publication?
2. Relationship to Literature: Does the paper show a sufficient understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources? Is any significant work overlooked?

走过路过 2021-03-01

Lucky to be invited for review! The specific details are as follows:
Keywords: Building Information Modelling, Simulation, Case Study
Date Assigned: 09-Mar-2020
Date Review Returned: 25-Mar-2020
Finally, this manuscript was rejected.

笑忘书 2021-02-19

Thank you, this old Wiley website should have been discontinued in 2008-2009.
The PDF link to view the article is here:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/0969-9988

温婉+佩玉鸣鸾+歌舞。 2021-02-10

Journal official website: https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/journal/ecam#editorial-team
Submission website: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ecaam

温婉+佩玉鸣鸾+歌舞。 2021-02-10

The given official website and journal submission website are incorrect!!!!
The correct ones are:
Official website: https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/journal/ecam#editorial-team
Journal submission website: https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/ecaam