All research papers submitted to Ciencia are subjected to scrutiny by pertinent experts. These experts are chosen based on their area of specialization and able to carry out constructive reviews with impartiality. They will perform reviews on (1) Relevance of the research content, (2) adequacy and efficiency of the methods, (3) significance and applicability of findings, (4) Originality of the topic, and (5) technical appropriateness and recommend acceptance or rejection for publication. The review process provides opportunity to the authors to uphold standards in claiming scientific ideas to be published in research journals.



Type of Refereeing System. Double-blind refereeing system is used by Ciencia. The double-blind policy in refereeing means that both authors and referees do not have knowledge of each other’s identity for the sole purpose of attaining total objectivity in the screening process of research articles. This policy shall be applied to all submitted articles both at the Editorial Board level and at the Board of Referees level. For the sake of retrieval and reference, only the Editor-in-Chief and Managing Editor are authorized to know the identity of the referees and authors.


Composition of the Panel of Referees/Reviewers. The Board of Referees for the WMSURJ is created per issue of the journal and based on the kinds of articles submitted for review. There shall be three (3) referees to review each article: one (1) internal and two (2) external referees. The total members of the panel and their qualifications vary depending on the number and the kinds of articles submitted for review.


Qualifications and Responsibilities of Referees. The Editorial Board is responsible for recruiting the members of the Peer Review Panel. A referee is recruited based on the following criteria: (a) preferably a doctorate in relevant discipline; (b) has published at least one paper in a refereed journal in the last five years; (c) has published at least one research article indexed by SCOPUS/WoS in the last five years; and (d) has received research related awards, and citation counts and H-index across his name. In addition, each referee is expected to take the following ethical responsibilities of reviewers: (a) A referee keeps the paper under review with utmost confidentiality; (b) A referee needs to critique the paper constructively; (c) S/he has to accept refereeing assignment only if s/he has adequate expertise on the subject; (d) S/he needs to evaluate the merit of the paper objectively; (e) S/he needs to reveal to the editor any conflict of interest, so the issue could be properly dealt with, or else he/she has to decline the role of the reviewer; (f) S/he has to act promptly and to complete the review within the period of not more than 30 days from the receipt of the paper under review.

Visitor Count
   Advance Search
   Current Issue
Title: Ciencia
Volume: Vol 38
Editorial Board: 8297Editorial Board (2019).pdf
Date: December 2019
Title(s): Quantitative Description of the Scutellum of Rice Black Bugs in the Philippines using Landmark-based Geometric Morphometrics
Author(s): Melbert C. Sepe, Mark Anthony J. Torres, Ravindra C. Joshi and Cesar G. Demayo
Discipline: Evolutionary Biology
College: College of Science and Mathematics
Keyword(s): Geometric morphometrics, Procrustes superimposition, RBB, Relative warp, Scutellum, Thin-plate spline
No. of Downloads: 15
View Abstract  
Download Content  
Title(s): On the Super-Riemann Integral in R: A Strong Kind of Riemann Integral
Author(s): Mark Anthony Bell R. Bacang and Greig Bates C. Flores
Discipline: Mathematics
College: College of Science and Mathematics
Keyword(s): Super-Riemann Integral, Cauchy Criterion, Change of Variable
No. of Downloads: 16
View Abstract  
Download Content  

Back to Top