As a peer-reviewed scientific journal, SEECI is firmly committed to quality and rigor in its editorial process. Therefore, every manuscript received undergoes a strict evaluation process consisting of successive stages, each of which must be approved to proceed to the next. Once authors submit their manuscript through the platform, it is subject to the following evaluation policies:

Peer Review (Double-Blind System):

After initial approval by the Editorial Committee, the manuscript is assigned to two or more external reviewers with expertise in the subject area of the article. These experts assess the work confidentially and anonymously (double-blind system), using the evaluation form established by the journal.

Reviewer Selection Criteria:

Reviewers are selected based on their specialization, ensuring expert and relevant evaluations. Additionally, they must be external to the author’s institution and not part of the journal’s editorial boards or committees.

Review Process Duration:

The estimated average time for manuscript review is between 30 and 60 days, with a maximum of 90 days for the full scientific evaluation. Once the review reports are received, the editor will forward them to the author along with the editorial decision: acceptance, request for modifications, or rejection. If revisions are requested, the specific recommendations from the reviewers will be included.

If the article requires further review after modification, it will be sent again to the same review team or to new reviewers, at the discretion of the Editorial Committee. In each review round, the author will have a period of 5 to 10 calendar days to submit the revised version, accompanied by a detailed justification of the changes made, as well as the reasons for not addressing certain comments, in case of disagreement.

Transparency and Communication:

Throughout all rounds of the evaluation process, SEECI ensures clear, timely, and well-founded communication with authors. Notifications will include the reasons for acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript, along with the scientific and technical reports issued by the reviewers. This practice ensures transparency and respect for the authors’ research efforts. Authors may express their agreement or disagreement with the editorial decision and submit additional comments or observations, which will be addressed within a maximum period of 15 days.

Conflicting Review Reports:

In cases where there is a contradiction between reviewers’ reports (e.g., one recommends minor revisions and another recommends rejection), or when the editor deems a report insufficiently substantiated, the manuscript will be sent to a third external reviewer to ensure an impartial process.

Editorial Decision: Evaluation Criteria

Manuscripts are accepted or rejected based on the following criteria:

• Originality of the work
• Soundness of the methodology
• Quality and coherence of the results and conclusions in relation to the objectives
• Clarity and precision of the language
• Compliance with SEECI’s editorial guidelines
• Adherence to ethical standards in scientific research
• Relevance and currency of the bibliographic references

Editorial Management and Database:

SEECI internally manages a database to register and process both the transfer of manuscripts and the assignment of reviewers. This selection is conducted through the Open Journal System editorial platform. At the end of each year, a list of the reviewers who collaborated during the period is published.