Peer Review Policy

The peer review process implemented by SEMAI (Journal of Scientific Exploration of Modern Agricultural Innovations) is outlined as follows:

Plagiarism Check:
Authors are advised to conduct a plagiarism check and ensure that their manuscript is free from copyright violations before submission. SEMAI will also perform a plagiarism check using TURNITIN software prior to the review process. Any manuscript with a plagiarism level exceeding 25% will be rejected or returned for revision.
Initial Review by Editor:
Manuscripts submitted by authors will undergo an initial review by the editor, focusing on alignment with the journal’s scope and adherence to the template. The editor may communicate with the author to provide feedback or decline submission if the manuscript does not meet the necessary criteria.
Double-Blind Review:
Manuscripts that pass the initial review will be sent to independent reviewers for content evaluation using a double-blind review method, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other.
Review Criteria:
The review process will consider several factors, including novelty, objectivity, methodology, scientific impact, conclusions, and the quality of references.
Reviewer Recommendations:
Reviewers will provide detailed feedback and suggestions for revisions, along with recommendations for acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. Authors will receive these comments to make necessary adjustments to their manuscript.
Editorial Decision:
The editor will make a final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations regarding whether the manuscript meets the publication requirements of SEMAI. The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final and absolute, though authors may inquire about the rationale for rejection if applicable.
Transparency and Appeal:
Authors have the right to request clarification on the review process and decisions. Any significant disagreements with the editorial decision may be addressed through a formal appeal, which will be considered by the editorial board.
Ethical Guidelines:
All participants in the peer review process (authors, reviewers, and editors) must adhere to ethical standards. Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript objectively and provide constructive feedback. They should declare any potential conflicts of interest that may affect their impartiality.
Confidentiality:
The editorial board and reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts under review. Any discussions regarding the manuscript should be conducted in a manner that respects the authors' privacy and intellectual property.
Handling of Complaints and Allegations:
Any allegations of misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism or unethical behavior by authors or reviewers, will be investigated thoroughly in line with COPE guidelines. Appropriate actions will be taken based on the findings of the investigation.
OJS System:
The entire review process is conducted fully through the Open Journal System (OJS), ensuring efficiency and transparency.