SWS Peer Review Process
SWS uses peer review process to improve the quality of each manuscript before publishing. The SWS Scientific Committee evaluates submitted manuscripts following a specific criteria, including originality, validity and significance.
All the Conference Proceedings and SWS Journals, published and controlled by SWS Society have strong peer review process for all submitted abstracts and manuscripts. There is a single or double blinded peer review (regarding the stage of the workflow process), to ensure an independent and transparent process between authors and reviewers. 
The entire peer review process takes within 2 or 3 weeks after the abstract/manuscript submission, according to the number of submitted manuscripts.

The SWS International Scientific Committee is the only competent authority in taking decisions on selection or rejection of the manuscripts, submitted to the SGEM Conferences and/or to SWS Journal of Earth and Planetary Science (EPS) or Social Sciences and Art (SSA).
The Committee have a special Reviewer Section with excellent reviewers. All the Reviewers are independent scientists and experts in the respective field., members of the SWS Scientific Committee.

from abstract submission to full paper acceptance and publication process:

  •  The abstracts/extended abstracts must be submitted trough the platform (website). Email submissions are accepted by exception only;
  •  Before submission, each author first should register himself by filling in My Profile section and giving short professional information. This information is confidential, but allows the Scientific and Program committee to control the workflow process and to maintain an audit trail of reviews despite anonymity of both sides - authors and peer reviewers;
  •  By submitting his paper electronically/or by email, each authors confirms that he is aware of the Publication Ethic & Malpractice Statement and the Privacy Policy;
  •  After submissions, the abstracts/extended abstracts automatically go in the pipeline for peer review - process controlled by the Abstract & Manuscript Management System (AMMS);
  •  Each abstract is reviewed in a double-blind peer review process by 2 reviewers minimum. The double-blind review process ensured that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the whole process. The authors do not know their reviewers and the reviewers don’t know the author/s of the reviewed abstracts;
  •  Reviewers complete their task in the Abstract & Manuscript Management System (AMMS). They should be prepared to provide some detail, particularly for negative evaluations. The reviewers could provide comment/feedback in AMMS, and private feedback for the other members of the EPS Scientific and Program Committee;
  •  Some of the submitted abstracts could be rejected, due to quality reasons or because the research is not in the scope of the conference. The abstracts are evaluated on academic validity, their adherence to the conference papers rules, conference topics, sub-topics and conference scope;
  •  When the review process is completed, authors are informed about the final decision of the review committee. There is a possibility the author to me asked to make some minor or major modifications of the abstract, the full paper or the chosen section;
  •  Full papers must be uploaded directly throughout the platform. Authors could update their abstract or full paper, any time till the final stage of pre-printing process. Papers that do not correspond to the abstracts will be rejected;
  •  After full paper submission, there is a second peer review process (with peer review criteria), that insured the academic validity and relevance of the paper. During this stage, authors could be encouraged to revise the papers in case: - full paper does not correspond to the initially submitted abstract, references are incorrectly formatted, grammar issues or there is a need the academic aspect of the paper to be improved;
  •  After the acceptance of the papers, they are copy-edited by the copy-editing team for final corrections. The authors also could review the proof for any final corrections. The copy-editing team reserves the right for style edit, format and length;
  •  The complete process should be finished prior to the oral/poster presentations at the conference venue. The accepted papers must be presented during the conference by the corresponding author - registered as a Lecturer. Every lecturer may join the event together with a co-lecturer/co-author, who is involved in the research and also registered as a Co-Lecturer;
  •  The authors/speakers are responsible for the quality of their submitted manuscripts.