Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to SENA: Journal of Science, Engineering and Natural Applications undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are forwarded to independent experts with appropriate expertise in the relevant field.

SENA applies a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. Each eligible manuscript is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers.

If a manuscript is developed from a paper previously presented at a conference, seminar, symposium, or other scientific meeting, the following requirements apply:

  • The submitted manuscript must be substantially revised, expanded, and rewritten so that it represents a significant development beyond the original conference or seminar paper.
  • At least 75% of the submitted manuscript must contain new or substantially developed content to demonstrate a meaningful original contribution.
  • Authors may be required to provide the original conference or seminar paper to the editorial team for comparison and verification.
  • Authors must clearly disclose any previous presentation or publication of related versions of the manuscript during submission.
  • If the previous version has been published and its copyright has been transferred to a conference organizer, publisher, or other party, the authors must obtain written permission from the copyright holder before publication in SENA. The manuscript cannot be published without the necessary copyright permission.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    The editorial team conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript is consistent with the aims and scope of SENA, demonstrates sufficient originality and scientific relevance, follows the journal's submission and formatting requirements, and complies with publication ethics. Manuscripts may also undergo similarity or plagiarism screening at this stage.
  2. Double-Blind Peer Review
    Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area. Reviewers evaluate aspects such as scientific originality, methodological rigor, validity of the analysis, clarity of presentation, relevance of the literature, interpretation of findings, and the manuscript's contribution to science, engineering, technology, or their applications.
  3. Reviewer Recommendation
    Based on their assessment, reviewers may recommend one of several outcomes, including acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and academically grounded comments to assist both authors and editors in improving and evaluating the manuscript.
  4. Author Revision
    When revisions are requested, authors must carefully address the reviewers' and editors' comments and submit a revised manuscript within the specified timeframe. Authors should also provide a point-by-point response explaining how each comment has been addressed or providing a reasoned academic justification when a suggested change has not been adopted.
  5. Re-evaluation
    Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the handling editor, depending on the extent of the revisions required. Manuscripts requiring major revisions may undergo additional rounds of peer review until the reviewers and editors are satisfied that the major scientific concerns have been adequately addressed.
  6. Final Editorial Decision
    The final decision regarding publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief or designated handling editor, taking into consideration the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' responses, the quality of the revised manuscript, and its compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical standards. Reviewer recommendations inform but do not determine the final editorial decision.
  7. Copyediting, Proofreading, and Publication
    Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, language and formatting checks, proofreading, and final production. Authors may be asked to review the final proof before the article is published online.

The peer review process of SENA: Journal of Science, Engineering and Natural Applications is designed to maintain the originality, scientific integrity, methodological rigor, transparency, and academic quality of all published articles. Editorial decisions are made based on scholarly merit and relevance to the journal without discrimination based on authors' institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or other personal characteristics.