Peer Review Process

1. Peer Review Type
Science Get Journal applies a double-blind peer review process. Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the authors, institutions, or research under review.

2. Editorial and Review Process

Initial Screening (Desk Evaluation)
Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the Editorial Office to ensure:

• Alignment with the journal’s scope in science
• Compliance with the author guidelines
• Adequate scientific quality and structure

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards may be rejected without external review.

Plagiarism Check
All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection tools to ensure originality and prevent academic misconduct.

Peer Review Process
Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the topic, such as Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, Geography, Environmental Science, Computer Science, Data Science, Natural Sciences Education, Engineering, Applied Sciences, and other interdisciplinary fields related to science and technology.
Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications and research experience.
The review process follows international best practices in scholarly publishing.

Editorial Decision
Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Reject

 3. Review Criteria
Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

• Relevance to science research and practice
• Originality and contribution to knowledge
• Methodological rigor and validity
• Clarity of data presentation and interpretation
• Quality of writing and manuscript organization
• Compliance with ethical standards

 4. Review Timeline
Science Get Journal is committed to an efficient and timely peer review process:

• Average review time: 1–3 weeks
• First decision: approximately 2–4 weeks after submission

5. Ethical Standards and Transparency
This journal adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards and follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Reviewers are expected to:

• Maintain strict confidentiality
• Declare any potential conflicts of interest
• Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback

 6. Author Revisions
Authors must:

• Address all reviewer comments carefully and systematically
• Submit a detailed response to reviewers
• Revise the manuscript within the specified timeframe

Failure to comply may result in rejection of the manuscript.

 7. Final Decision
The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on:

• Reviewer recommendations
• Quality of revisions
• Overall scientific merit and relevance

 8. Production and Publication
Accepted manuscripts will undergo:

• Professional copyediting and proofreading
• Layout and formatting

All articles are published under an open access model, ensuring free and immediate access to readers worldwide.

 9. Appeals and Complaints
Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal request with clear justification. Appeals will be reviewed objectively by the editorial board.

 10. General Provisions
The journal may assign additional reviewers when necessary. A rapid review process may be applied for urgent public health issues. Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts at any stage if ethical concerns arise.