Publication Process

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's online submission system. Manuscript files, author information, required declarations and bibliographic metadata should be entered completely.

Submissions are screened for file integrity, anonymization, ethical declarations, references, tables, figures and system metadata. Incomplete submissions may be returned to the author for correction.

Manuscripts that complete technical screening undergo editorial assessment. For properly completed submissions, this stage is concluded within 2 days.

Alignment with the journal's aims and scope, scientific quality, methodological adequacy, ethical requirements, originality, reporting quality and scholarly contribution are considered.

A manuscript may proceed to peer review, be returned for preliminary revision or be declined without external review.

Submissions are considered in relation to research ethics, publication ethics and academic integrity. Similarity screening may be conducted where appropriate.

A similarity percentage is not used as a stand-alone acceptance or rejection criterion. The source of similarity, citation practices, technical terminology and overall manuscript structure are evaluated editorially.

Manuscripts suitable for external review are assigned to an editor according to subject area. Editors with a conflict of interest do not participate in the evaluation or decision process.

SAER Journal applies a double-anonymous peer-review model in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process.

Each manuscript is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers assess scientific quality, methodology, data analysis, findings, discussion, originality, ethical compliance and contribution to the relevant field.

Peer review is concluded within 5 days following the completion of reviewer assignment.

Reviewer reports are considered collectively by the editor. Where reviewer opinions differ substantially, additional evaluation or another reviewer may be requested.

Authors may be asked to undertake minor or major revisions. Revisions should clearly identify changes and, where necessary, respond to reviewer or editor comments point by point.

Revised manuscripts are reassessed by the editor and may be returned to reviewers when further scientific evaluation is required.

Following completion of peer review and any required revisions, a final editorial decision is made. Decisions may include acceptance, further revision or rejection.

Accepted manuscripts undergo final technical and editorial checks, including authorship details, title, abstract, keywords, references, tables, figures, ethics declarations, conflicts of interest, funding information and bibliographic metadata.

Eligible articles that complete final checks are assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) and prepared for electronic publication.

Publication-ready articles are added directly to the open issue for the relevant publication period without waiting for other manuscripts in the issue to be completed.

SAER Journal does not use a separate Early View or ahead-of-print stage. Published articles immediately form part of the final content of the relevant issue.

Significant errors, ethical concerns or scholarly-record issues identified after publication are handled under the journal's relevant policies. Corrections, retractions or expressions of concern are linked to the existing article record where required.