Peer-Review Process & Editorial Independence | Southern Cross Academic Press

Peer-Review Model & Evaluation Standards

Peer-ReviewedImpartial Evaluation

All submissions are evaluated in accordance with the peer-review model and editorial policies stated on the respective journal website. Manuscripts may undergo an initial editorial assessment before being sent for external review.

Publication decisions are based on the manuscript's academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and reviewers' recommendations, as applicable.

Strict APC Independence Principle

Payment of any applicable article processing charge does not guarantee acceptance or influence the outcome of peer review. The publisher supports editorial independence and expects editors and reviewers to maintain confidentiality, disclose conflicts of interest, and treat authors fairly throughout the evaluation process.

Peer-Review Workflow Stages

How manuscripts navigate our editorial and external review cycle:

Initial Editorial Assessment

Every manuscript is initially screened by the Editor-in-Chief or handling Editor to evaluate fit with journal scope, academic rigor, basic formatting compliance, and originality screening.

Independent External Peer Review

Qualified subject-matter experts assess manuscripts impartially and confidentially. Reviewers evaluate methodological soundness, novelty, significance, and ethical compliance.

Merit-Based Decision Making

Publication decisions rest entirely on manuscript quality and peer reviewers' critical assessments. Editors determine whether manuscripts are accepted, require revisions, or are declined.

Confidentiality & Fair Treatment

All reviewer reports and correspondence remain confidential. Editors and reviewers must disclose any competing interests and evaluate submissions with complete impartiality.

Back to Publish With Us

Author Guidelines Digital Preservation & Archives