Papers submitted to SCIREA must contain original material. The submitted paper, or any translation of it, must neither be published, nor be submitted for publication elsewhere. Violations of these rules will normally result in an immediate rejection of the submission without further review.

Contributions should be written in English and include a 100-300 words abstract. SCIREA's journals usually welcome the following types of contributions:

• Original research articles
• Review articles, providing a comprehensive review on a scientific topic

In short, all manuscripts submitted for publication in our journals are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed. The review process is single blind. If the manuscript is accepted for full review, it will be reviewed by a minimum of three external reviewers.

Submitted manuscripts will undergo a detailed initial check including a Plagiarism Check in the Editorial Office. An Editor – usually the Editor-in-Chief or a board member of the journal – together with the Editorial Office takes charge of the peer-review process. It starts with a Preliminary Review by the Editor (finished no more than 3 days after manuscript submission).

After a manuscript is accepted for full review, the Editor will collect at least two review comments and prepare a decision letter based on the comments of the reviewers (finished no more than 3 weeks after preliminary review). The decision letter is sent to the Corresponding Author to request an adequate revision (peer-reviewed again whenever necessary). The author will be asked to format the manuscript according to SCIREA’s template before it goes into typesetting and proofreading with the publisher. The author will receive the paper in PDF produced by SCIREA for checking before it is publishedonline.

SCIREA asks authors to grant SCIREA a nonexclusive copyright. In this way authors continue to hold copyright with no restrictions. Based on its copyright SCIREA produces the final paper in SCIREA’s layout. This version is given to the public (and also back to the authors) under the Creative Commons license (CC BY or CC BY-NC). For this reason authors may also publish the final paper in any repository or on any website with a complete citation of the paper. When linking to their paper, authors should make use of the link that SCIREA has established with crossref.org. It is a pointer to the full text of the final paper. The URL provides a persistent link which will never break. This link has the form http://dx.doi.org/10.54647/XXYourPaperNumber.

SCIREA is committed to maintaining high standards through a rigorous peer-review together with strict ethical policies. Any infringements of professional ethical codes, such as plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, bogus claims of authorship, should be taken very seriously by the editors with zero tolerance.

SCIREA follows the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and follows the COPE Flowcharts for Resolving Cases of Suspected Misconduct. SCIREA especially observes COPE's Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. Editors at SCIREA follow COPE's Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Authors should be aware of a possible Conflict of Interest. In such a case authors can still take responsibility for the accuracy of their paper, but must inform the reader with an appropriate statement in the Acknowledgements.

SCIREA recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record. The historic record of published research articles shall remain available and unaltered as far as possible. However, circumstances may arise where a paper got published based on misconduct or honest error. Editors certainly guide the review process with much care, but it remains notoriously difficult to detect all occurrences of misconduct or error. For this reason it may become necessary to correct the scholarly record. The decision to alter the record should not be taken lightly. Action taken depends on the individual case and can take the form of
• Expression of Concern
• Correction (Erratum or Corrigendum)
• Retraction
• Removal
The purpose of the action is to correct the literature and to alert readers. It is not intended to punish the author(s).

The responsibility of guiding an investigation of misconduct or honest error is with the editor of the journal concerned. Authors and reviewers will take part in the investigation. The editor will decide on the form to best correct the scholarly record. Guiding principles are COPE's Retraction Guidelines and other accepted scholarly principles.

Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the metadata or a reader's ability to understand an article and that do not involve a scientific error or omission are corrected such that the original article is replaced with the corrected version.

If final action originates from an author's request, SCIREA will help to process it without extra charges. If the measures taken (e.g. a retraction) were not initiated by the author(s) or are even taken without mutual agreement, the author(s) will not be financially compensated and Article Processing Charges (APC) will not be reimbursed.

In short, all manuscripts submitted for publication in our journals are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed. The review process is single blind. If the manuscript is accepted for full review, it will be reviewed by a minimum of two external reviewers.

Submitted manuscripts will undergo a detailed initial check including a Plagiarism Check in the Editorial Office. An Editor – usually the Editor-in-Chief or a board member of the journal – together with the Editorial Office takes charge of the peer-review process. It starts with a Preliminary Review by the Editor (finished no more than 10 days after manuscript submission).

After a manuscript is accepted for full review, the Editor will collect at least two review comments and prepare a decision letter based on the comments of the reviewers (finished no more than 3 weeks after preliminary review). The decision letter is sent to the Corresponding Author to request an adequate revision (peer-reviewed again whenever necessary). The author will be asked to format the manuscript according to SCIREA’s template before it goes into typesetting and proofreading with the publisher. The author will receive the paper in PDF produced by SCIREA for checking before it is published online.

SCIREA is one of the largest academic Open Access publishers worldwide. Manuscripts submitted to all our journals are peer-reviewed. Reviewers are involved in all manuscripts submitted to our journals. Based on the reviewer's comments, a Handling Editor (usually the Editor-in-Chief) is subsequently making a final decision about the way a manuscript needs to be improved. We at SCIREA sincerely invite you to join our peer-review program. By participating you will provide help to authors from all over the world and will supply them with your ideas and suggestions based on your valuable expertise.

If you are ready to be a volunteer, please submit your CV to service@scirea.org with email subject: Peer-Reviewer Application. The procedures can be outlined as follows:
(1) Send us your CV;
(2) Become a peer-reviewer;
(3) Receive manuscripts from us, review the manuscripts, and send back your comments within 25 days.

“We are sincerely grateful to scholars who generously give their time to peer-review articles submitted to our journals. We recognize that rigorous peer-review is the foundation of high-quality academic publishing, and we are appreciative of the contributions of our peer-reviewers in maintaining the standard of excellence that we strive to achieve.”
---- The SCIREA editorial team.

Journal editors are the gatekeepers for quality and responsible research content. The SCIREA Editor Resources website aims to provide insights and support for our journal editors to maximize journal impact, and connect them with the editor community.

SCIREA's in-house staff consists of a Journal Manager, Assistant Editors, Production Editors, Copyeditors, Software Engineers, and Administrative Specialists. Collaborating editors on our Editorial Boards are typically employed at academic institutions or corporate research facilities located all over the world. The in-house editorial staff can be contacted mainly via email and telephone. Each Journal's Editor-in-Chief and assistant editor process manuscripts through the peer-review and production procedures, while the journal manager has overall editorial responsibility for the journals. Production Editors and Copyeditors are responsible for converting accepted content into a publishable format, such as full-text PDF, XML, and HTML versions. Contact information for the SCIREA team can be found at https://www.scirea.org/contact.

An Editor will be asked to review one or two manuscripts per year and may help to edit a special issue on a topic related to his or her research interests. Additionally, the editors will be approached for input or feedback regarding new regulations relating to the journal from time to time. Editorial Board members are also encouraged to help to promote the journal among their peers or at conferences. The communication with Editorial Board members is done primarily by E-mail. The initial term for an Editorial Board membership is two years and can be renewed. An Editorial Board member may also step down from the position at any time if he or she feels overloaded by the requests from the journal’s Editorial Office.

Overseeing the peer review process Peer review, also known as refereeing, is a collaborative process that allows independent experts in the same field of research to evaluate and comment on manuscript submissions. The outcome of a peer review gives authors feedback to improve their work and, critically, allows the editor to assess the paper’s suitability for publication. People that are involved in the peer review process include editors, reviewers, authors and editorial board members.

Initial Evaluation
All manuscripts are processed using SCIREA' in-house Manuscript Tracking System. Once we receive a manuscript, our Editorial Office runs a plagiarism check and screens the manuscript to decide whether or not it should be sent for peer review. It is therefore very important for authors to make sure that their manuscript is well written and is of high quality. During the initial screening, our Editorial Office mainly checks the following:
1. Does the manuscript fit the journal’s scope?
2. Is the content of the manuscript is good enough to make it worth reviewing?
3. Is the manuscript compliant with the journal’s Instructions for Authors?
4. Has the manuscript been submitted or published elsewhere?
If manuscript fails to meet the journal's requirements, it is immediately rejected.

Peer Review After manuscripts clear the initial screening, they are assigned to either a Regional Editor/Editor-in-Chief. The Regional Editor/Editor-in-Chief assigns manuscripts to a Handling Editor. The handling editor will send the manuscript to a minimum of 3 reviewers for peer review. Reviewers submit the evaluation results along with their recommendations as one of the following actions:
1. Accept
2. Minor Revision
3. Major Revision
4. Reject & Resubmit
5. Reject
We have a single blinded peer-review process in which the reviewers know who the authors of the manuscript are, but the authors do not have access to the information of who the peer reviewers are. All our journals acknowledge the researchers who have performed the peer-review and without the significant contributions made by these researchers, the publication of the journal would not be possible.
We try our best to adhere to the guidelines laid out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We also forward the guidelines to our reviewers to ensure the highest ethical standards of evaluation.

Final Decision In order for the handling editor to provide a recommendation regarding the manuscript, at least two completed reviews are required. Once the reviewers have submitted their comments, the handling editor will be notified. The handling editor will then send their recommendations to the Regional Editor/Editor-in-Chief. The Regional Editor/Editor-in-Chief delivers and informs the author of the final decision.
If the manuscript is conditionally accepted, authors will be required to revise their manuscript according to the Editor’s suggestions and submit a revised version of their manuscript for further evaluation.
Our Editorial Workflow allows editors to reject manuscripts due to a number of reasons including inappropriateness of the subject, lack of quality, or incorrectness of the results. We ensure high quality and unbiased peer-review by sending the manuscript for evaluation to a range of reviewers in different parts of the world.