Document version 1.0. Last review: 12/12/2022.

The manuscripts submitted to the SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES for publication must be unpublished (they must not be subject to any other printed or digital journal). The authors are responsible for the opinions, results, and ideas declared in the article. The precision of the manuscript information, including figures and tables, is the full responsibility of the authors.

During the submission process of the article, authors must attach the cover letter in which it should be related to at least four potential reviewers with their respective data. It is the authors' responsibility to notify the potential reviewers that they may be invited to review a manuscript.

Only after the editorial board verifies that the manuscript follows the required format set out in the guide for authors (TEMPLATE FILE) and its content is appropriate for publication, it is sent to peer-review according to the research topic (manuscripts that are not following the journal theme or style will be returned without being evaluated). The manuscript is sent to at least two reviewers (the number of evaluators can differ for each manuscript, depending on the research field).

Then, the article gets in an evaluation stage that can be extended up to three months, depending on the time of evaluation acceptance. Finally, reviewers have up to twenty (20) days to submit their concepts (in some cases, depending on the evaluator's availability, this time extends up to one month).

Main reasons for rejection include but are not limited to: Plagiarism, false information, not providing the requested improvements done by the reviewers, inconsistent references.

Review process step by step

1- The authors submit the formatted original manuscript and the cover letter (the templates are available for download).

1.1- The received files will be initially verified for consistency, completeness, focus, quality, and the SJS actively checks the manuscripts for plagiarism through software screening, normally the journal screens the text using Grammarly or ProWritingAid (complementary methods may be used, such as an internet search on DuckDuck Go or Google). The file will receive a tracking number generated by the e-mail system (to be used in all the messages exchanged among the authors and the editors). If the initial evaluation is positive, the authors may receive an invoice order to deposit the Submission Fee (SF); If the initial evaluation is negative two actions may occur:

Action a) immediately rejection of the manuscript;

Action b) Improvement requests. If the author is incapable of providing positive results on the necessary requests of improvement, the author may receive two attempts to complete this step successfully. Fail will imply the rejection of the manuscript.

2- After the manuscript has successfully received for evaluation, it will go to the double blind peer review. At least two reviewers will be invited to evaluate the manuscript.

2.1- The returned evaluations will be compiled in at least one file and returned to the author for providence.

2.2 - The author must perform all the required modifications on the manuscript and send it back to the editors. If any doubts emerge, the reviewers may be contacted again to perform a new evaluation of the manuscript. If it is all approved by the editors and reviewers, the authors will receive an invoice order for the APCs.

3- After the confirmation of the APC deposit, the manuscript will be published on the next available issue. Plan ahead the publication of the manuscript.

Double-blind peer review

The SOUTHERN JOURNAL OF SCIENCES uses the double-blind peer-review process to ensure quality, reliability, and integrity of evaluation. This modality consists of maintaining the anonymity of both the authors and reviewers throughout the editorial process. Moreover, precise review instructions containing the aspects to be evaluated are sent to each reviewer. It is up to the reviewer to make annotations within the manuscript. Possible results for the review process After receiving the reviews (minimum two concepts), the editorial committee sends the editorial decision to the corresponding author. Based on the reviewer's concepts, the editor may decide:
  • To accept with minimal changes: Authors should submit a new version to the journal. Then, when the editor verifies that changes were made, the article could be accepted.
  • To accept the manuscript with significant changes: Authors must send a new version to the journal, which will be submitted to a short review by the editorial committee. Authors must also submit a letter detailing the changes made or the reasons for the changes not made according to the review concepts.
  • To reject: The authors are welcome to submit the manuscript to another journal or to restart the submission process. If so, the new version will be treated as a new and individual article. New submissions corresponding to previously rejected articles must include a letter detailing all the changes made and the reasons that validate the new submission.