As a refereed scientific journal, SEECI is committed to submitting each proposed article to a strict review process, in which each stage requires approval in order to move on to the next. Once the author has submitted his/her article through this platform, it is subject to the following review policies:

• First stage of review: The works will be submitted to a first evaluation by the Editorial Committee, in which it is verified that the manuscript is in accordance with the criteria of clarity, pertinence and relevance, as well as the editorial guidelines of the journal, non-compliance with the criteria reflected in the Checklist implies an automatic rejection. It is also important that the subject matter addressed is of interest to the journal. Authors of articles that are not accepted in this first evaluation will be informed of the rejection within a period not exceeding fifteen working days.

• In case the manuscript presents superficial problems of structure and/or form, the editor will send the authors the pertinent suggestions so that they can be corrected before the manuscript is sent to the reviewers. In this case, the author will have a maximum of 10 days to submit the corrected manuscript to the editor. The editor reserves the right to make basic formal modifications, which do not affect the content of the text, in order to expedite the editorial process.

• Peer review system (peer review). Once approved by the Editorial Committee, two or more external expert reviewers will be assigned to evaluate the article confidentially and anonymously (double blind). They will use the form for reviewers for their report.

• Duration of the manuscript review process: the average time spent by SEECIreviewers is 30 to 60 days. The editor will send the author the review report received, as well as the recommendations (if any) for modification of the article, or, failing that, the decision to reject the manuscript together with the review reports. If necessary, the manuscript will be sent again to the reviewers to continue the evaluation process until the final rejection or approval decision is reached. In each case, the author will have 5 days to submit to the editor the corrected manuscript together with a justification of the changes introduced, as well as those discrepancies that lead to the non-modification of one or more of the aspects pointed out by the reviewers, if any.

 

In case of:

• There is contradiction between the judgments issued by the reviewers (for example, one reviewer is of the opinion that the article should be rejected and a second reviewer issues a judgment in favor of its publication with minor changes).

• The editor is not completely convinced of the justification accompanying the judgment made by one reviewer, the article will be sent to a third reviewer.

 

The journal has a database for internal use that processes and records the transfer of articles and the set of reviewers. The list of reviewers in the period of one year is published after this period.

Criteria for selection of reviewers. Two reviewers are selected according to their area of expertise (which guarantees a value judgment based on expert knowledge of the subject matter). Moreover, the reviewers are external to the author's institution, as well as to the committees and editorial bodies of the journal.

Editorial decision. The criteria for acceptance or rejection of papers are as follows:

• Originality of the manuscript.

• Methodology.

• Quality of the results and conclusions and coherence with the objectives stated in the manuscript.

• Clarity of the language used.

• Compliance with the rules of the journal.

• Ethical conduct in accordance with the canons applicable to scientific research, and relevance and timeliness of the bibliographic references.

• Relevance and timeliness of the bibliographical references consulted.

 

Once the evaluation process has been completed, the main author will be notified of the acceptance or rejection of the paper. The contact author will be informed of the rejection of the manuscript sent, attaching the reports of the evaluators. In this situation the author / s can / n expose their agreement or not with that opinion, as well as any other opinions or questions they wish to raise, being answered within a maximum period of 15 days.