Guidelines for Authors

Abstract

The abstract should contain:

  • Title of the research
  • Abstract: Not more than 200 words.
  • Formatting spacing between title, author(s), affiliation(s) and abstract according to the abstract template.
  • Please submit the abstract here using the template here.

Full Paper

  • All accepted papers will be published in Scopus-indexed proceedings, subject to fulfilment of standards and criteria set by the publisher.
  • The submission of full paper should comply with the format.
  • You may download the template here. Do use the template provided for abstract preparation and full paper submission, to avoid rejection.

Content

  • Language
    Manuscripts should be written in English. For authors not fluent in English, we recommend having the manuscript carefully read by an English-speaking colleague or a professional editing service before publication.
  • Title
    Manuscripts must be submitted with a full title which appears at the top of the article. The title should reflect the contents of the paper and be specific, descriptive, concise, and comprehensible to readers outside the subject field (please avoid abbreviations and a title written in capital letters).
  • Authors and Affiliations
    The authors should specify in the article their first and last names and relevant addresses (department, university/ organization, city, state/province and country). The list of co-authors should remain unchanged after a final decision is made by the Editors.
    At least one author of the article should attend the conference. To avoid serial publications pratices, it is recommended to publish a maximum of two articles per author in this proceeding (regardless of his/her position in the list). 
  • Abstract
    The abstract should describe the main objective(s) of the study. It should be informative and report the main results and conclusions. 
  • Introduction
    The introduction should provide background that puts the manuscript into context and allows readers outside the field to understand the purpose and significance of the study. It should define the problem addressed and explain why it is important.
  • Figures
    Authors who reproduce a figure or a table from another publication should clearly indicate the origin of the article and should also obtain the permission for reproduction from the author(s) and publisher concerned. Each figure and table should be cited in the text. Each figure and table should have a caption. The number of figures is not limited. However, it is important to make sure that all figures are necessary, not redundant, and well designed.
  • References
    Authors should check the references to ensure they are correct. References should be listed at the end of the manuscript. Comments and notes are usually not allowed in the references; they should be placed as footnotes.  
  • Plagiarism
    Do run through plagiarism detecting applications such as TurnitIn to ensure the similarity percentage is lower than 20%.

Peer Review Policies

Peer Review Process

All submitted full papers will be peer-reviewed. The acceptance will be granted if the recommendations from the reviewers are positive. The criteria are based on the technical contents, clarity and format. Authors should make sure the submitted papers use the template for this conference. There are three review processes: initial review of the abstract, peer review of the full manuscript and recommendation.

Initial Review of Abstract
The editorial team evaluates each abstract submitted to determine if its topic and content are suitable before being reviewed. Abstracts that do not meet minimum criteria or the theme of the conference are returned to the authors. This is in the best interest of the authors, who could then decide to either revise the abstract or to submit the manuscript to a more appropriate venue, avoiding delays from a lengthy review process that would nonetheless lead to rejection.

Peer Review of Full Manuscript
Authors whose abstracts were accepted will be requested to prepare the full manuscript within 3 weeks. These manuscripts will then be sent to two blind peer reviewers of relevant expertise. The reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, soundness of methodology, impact to design research, and relevance to design practices. To facilitate timely publication, reviewers are asked to complete their reviews and provide individual critiques within two weeks. After collecting the reviewers’ reports, the editorial team makes a recommendation on the acceptability of the manuscript.

Reviewers will assess the following key aspects of the manuscripts:

  • Scope: Does the subject matter fall within the journal's/ proceeding's domain?
  • Originality: Are there sufficient novel results to merit publication?
  • Technical Accuracy: Is the paper free from errors and technically sound?
  • Clarity and Organization: Is the work presented clearly and concisely? Is it well-structured?
  • Title: Does the title accurately reflect the content?
  • Abstract: Is the abstract informative, highlighting the main results and conclusions?
  • Illustrations: Are the figures of high quality, relevant, and easy to understand?
  • Bibliography: Does the reference list provide a comprehensive view of the current state-of-the-art in the field?
  • Language Quality: Is the manuscript written in clear and satisfactory language?
 
Acceptance Decision
Based on the reviewers’ comments, the editorial team makes a final decision on the acceptability of the manuscript and communicates to the authors the decision, along with reviewers’ reports. The status reports to reviewers should identify the reviewers of each paper, the final decision can be “Accept Submission”, “Revisions Required”, or “Decline Submission.” The revised version should be submitted considering the review comments.

Reviewers are requested to provide unbiased and constructive comments aimed, whenever possible, at improving the work. Reviewers are encouraged to provide timely reviews and to keep the information confidential. In cases where the reviewers cannot agree, an independent expert can be asked to act as an adjudicator.

The editor has complete responsibility and authority to accept a paper for publication or to reject it. Web of Conferences editorial team is equally authorized not to accept an article because of the poor quality.
 
Plagiarism
The authors should make sure that the manuscript pass a criterion of maximum 20 percent similarities to other publications.

Policies For Publication of Errata and For Article Retraction

Once the paper is published online, further changes and amendments cannot be accepted unless by an Erratum. Authors should notify the Editors of the conference if an error is discovered in a published work so that an appropriate correction note (erratum) is published if necessary.