Editorial

The Journal has experienced substantial growth in the last few years which resulted in an additional growth of 300 printed pages, a change in page budget in 2004. During this time, we have also experienced a high impact factor of 0.77 in 2004 which is among the highest for comparable journals in the field. The Immediacy Index for JSE exceeds all other structural engineering and related journals by a wide margin. The Impact Factor and the Immediacy Index are two standard metrics used to measure citations to journal articles over time. The build-up of citations typically follows a curve referred to as the “citation curve.” The impact factor is a measure of the relative size of the citation curve in the second and third years. It is calculated by dividing the number of citations to papers published in the two previous years by the number of papers published in those same years. The immediacy index, on the other hand, provides a measure of the skewness of the citation curve and is calculated by dividing the citations in the current year by the number of papers it publishes in that year. This is a measure of how quickly items in that journal get cited upon publication.

While these figures are encouraging, there are some recent trends that are also a cause for concern. The most recent statistics for the Journal indicates that the median turnaround time from submission to publication has increased from 19 to 21 months, despite the fact that there has been an increased in printed pages. The primary cause for the increased turnaround time is mostly delays in the review process. While the blame can sometimes be attributed to Associate Editors handling the review of papers, some of the blame has also to point to those of us, who are called upon to conduct the peer review of submitted manuscripts.

Since self-citations (meaning citations in a paper to articles previously published in the same journal) are included in the impact factor calculation, it is obvious (given the $20+$ month turnaround) that the current impact factor of the Journal is generated almost exclusively by citations to JSE by papers published in other journals. A reduction in the mean turnaround time can contribute significantly to both the appeal of the journal and to further increasing the impact factor. I recognize that focusing on such metrics should not be the sole objective of a premier journal. Nonetheless, it is important that research findings be communicated to the readers in a timely fashion.

It is up to us as authors, reviewers and readers of the Journal, to maintain our tradition of excellence and continue to attract the best papers in the field. The growth in number of journals (including the emergence of web-based publications) over the past decade and the influx of papers from an increasing population of researchers from around the world have ushered a new phase in research reporting. In the light of this surge in submissions, I am taking additional steps to prescreen articles, so that only those papers that fit the scope of the Journal and make a contribution to the current state-of-the-art are considered for full review.

I have also taken numerous proactive steps to monitor the timeliness of reviews and to call upon Associate Editors whose backlogs start to grow. But these steps will not produce the desired effect, if reviewers do not fulfill their share of the responsibility in the review process and respond promptly to review requests. The primary purpose of archival publication is to facilitate timely communication of research findings to engineers and other researchers. If review times continue to grow, frustrated authors will seek other avenues to publish their work. Likewise, over the long term, the readership of the journal may also decline. It is, therefore, obvious that the consequences of delayed reviews can ultimately have a profound effect on the stature and prestige that the Journal enjoys among structural engineers and researchers world-wide.

I would like to emphasize, however, that rapid turnaround should in no way affect the quality of the review. Ultimately, a review is carried out in several hours in a single, two, or at most three readings. Hence, it is simply a matter of assigning a higher level of importance to the task of paper-reviewing. Another concern brought to my attention by several Associate Editors is the fact that “qualified” reviewers frequently turn down requests to review a paper. While I do acknowledge that this may be a consequence of the volume of activity that some of us find ourselves in, we should not overlook the adverse effects of published papers that have undergone a review by less qualified reviewers.

I, therefore, extend this earnest plea to all readers who will be called upon to conduct a review for JSE in the near future. An important responsibility is being thrust upon your shoulders and I hope, you will give this task the same importance and value that you would want another reviewer to extend to your own submission.