Review Process at the Southern Journal of Sciences

Document version 1.1. Last review: 07/01/2025.

The Southern Journal of Sciences (South. J. Sci.) upholds the highest standards of academic publishing through a rigorous double-blind peer review process. This system ensures objectivity, integrity, and transparency while maintaining the quality of published research. Here's a comprehensive overview of our review process:

Initial Manuscript Assessment

When a manuscript arrives, our editorial team conducts a thorough desk review examining several key aspects:

  • Alignment with journal scope and aims
  • Completeness of documentation
  • Adherence to formatting guidelines
  • Language and grammar quality
  • Ethical compliance
  • Originality verification through plagiarism detection

During this initial assessment, authors may receive preliminary feedback to enhance their manuscript before peer review, helping streamline the overall process.

Reviewer Selection and Management

Our editorial board carefully selects reviewers based on three primary criteria:

  • Subject matter expertise
  • Geographic diversity
  • Independence from authors' institutions

While authors may suggest potential reviewers, the final selection remains at the editorial board's discretion. To maintain objectivity, we never select reviewers from the same institution as the authors.

The Review Process

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts using comprehensive criteria including:

  • Scientific originality and significance
  • Methodological soundness
  • Data presentation and analysis
  • Ethical compliance
  • Writing clarity and organization
  • Literature coverage and citation appropriateness

Timeline and Communication

  • Initial Editorial Decision: We strive to provide first decisions within 14 days of submission
  • Total Review Process: The complete process typically takes between 120 to 260 days
  • Communication: Authors receive prompt notifications of any delays or significant developments

Decision Categories

The editorial team makes one of four decisions based on reviewer recommendations:

  1. Accept without revisions
  2. Accept with minor revisions
  3. Major revisions required (resubmission invited)
  4. Reject
Representation of the Review Process at the Southern Journal of Sciences
Manuscript Submission Initial Review Phase Desk Review Scope Alignment Documentation Formatting Language Quality Return to Author for Improvements Peer Review Phase Reviewer Selection Editorial Decision Accept Minor Revisions Major Revisions Reject Publication

Quality Assurance Tools

We employ various tools and practices to maintain publication standards:

  • Grammarly for language and style verification
  • Specialized plagiarism detection software (Grammarly and others, including manual search or AI searching tools)
  • Structured review forms ensuring comprehensive evaluation
  • Multiple stages of quality control

Reviewer Recognition and Support

We value our reviewers' contributions and offer:

  • Certificates of review completion (available upon request)
  • Detailed guidelines supporting thorough evaluations
  • Recognition in annual reviewer acknowledgments
  • Professional development opportunities

Continuous Improvement

The journal regularly evaluates and enhances its peer review process by:

  • Gathering feedback from authors and reviewers
  • Updating guidelines to reflect best practices
  • Implementing new tools and technologies
  • Maintaining alignment with international publishing standards

Ethical Standards

Our commitment to ethical publishing includes:

  • Strict conflict of interest policies
  • Confidentiality protection
  • Transparency in process and decisions
  • Fair and unbiased evaluation procedures

This robust peer review system ensures that the Southern Journal of Sciences continues to serve as a trusted platform for scholarly communication while maintaining the highest standards of academic publishing.