- Publication Frequency
- Open access & copyright policy
- Article processing charges
- Business model
- Peer review process
- Authorship and Author Responsibilities
- Research Integrity: How to Reuse Text
- Territorial Descriptions, Maps and Affiliations
- Funding Disclosure
- Ethical policy
- Conflict of interest
- Material and Data Policies
- Permanency of content
- Appeals, Complaints and Concerns
SEISENSE publishes articles on rolling bases. It means articles are published as soon as they are peer-reviewed, accepted, copyedited, and proofread.
All SEISENSE articles are published with open access under the CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license (the current version is CC-BY, version 4.0). This means that the author(s) retains copyright, but the content is free to download, distribute, and adapt for commercial or non-commercial purposes, given appropriate attribution to the original article.
Upon submission, the author(s) grants SEISENSE a license to publish, including to display, store, copy, and reuse the content. The CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license enables anyone to use the publication freely, giving appropriate attribution to the author(s) and citing SEISENSE as the original publisher. The CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license does not apply to third-party materials that display a copyright notice to prohibit copying. Unless the third-party content is also subject to a CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license, or an equally permissive license, the author(s) must comply with any third-party copyright notices.
At SEISENSE we guarantee that no university library or individual reader will ever have to buy a subscription or pay any pay-per-view fees to access articles in the electronic version of the journal. So, there is no submission or publication fee for the journal. We do not want fees to prevent the publication of worthy work.
We are thankful to PKP – for providing Open Journal System platform and sponsoring the SJOM for CrossRef DOI. SEISENSE is a complete academic publishing portal, run by active researchers, that enables the publication of a journal. The service is organized around two key principles: openness and quality. Open Access is free for readers and authors, decoupling the scientific and financial issues. The SJOM works as a non-profit foundation, with an editorial board and reviewers working on a volunteer basis. SJOM works with supporting partners to offset the financial cost, funding national/international bodies, foundations, and benefactors.
The SJOM allows and encourages authors to deposit their pre-and post-prints in Open-Access institutional archives or repositories. All authors hold full copyright and self-archiving rights. Authors can archive their articles in open access repositories as “post-prints”. To digitally preserve all published scholarly content, the SEISENSE Journal of Management commits to submitting all its journals' metadata to PKP Preservation Network (PN). This is to make sure that the published scholarly content by SEISENSE Publishing remains available to the community despite any accidental loss of data in its personal archival records. SEISENSE Publishing has further made sure that the metadata of its open-access journal is compliant with well-known repository services and their digital crawlers may regularly collect it for record and preservation.
SEISENSE JOM uses a double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. To facilitate this, authors need to ensure that their manuscripts are prepared to not give away their identity. To help with this preparation please ensure the following when submitting to the journal:
- Submit the Title Page containing the author's details and Blinded Manuscript with no author details as two separate files.
- After a paper is submitted to the SJOM, a journal editor screens the manuscript and generates a plagiarism report using Turnitin. If the manuscript falls in the journal scope and plagiarism is below 10% the handling editor sends invitations to at least two individuals they believe would be appropriate reviewers. If a paper does not pass through the stage, the handling editor rejects the paper on a desk.
- Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it or a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
- Finally, SJOM editors or the editorial board consider the peer reviewers’ reports and decide to accept or reject the manuscript for publication. If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor includes constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article.
SEISENSE follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidelines which state that, in order to qualify for authorship of a manuscript, the following criteria should be observed:
- substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data for the work;
- drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content;
- provide approval for publication of the content;
- agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Contributors who do not meet these criteria, but nonetheless provided important contributions to the final manuscript, should be included in the acknowledgement section. It is the author’s responsibility to get written approval by persons named in the acknowledgment section.
Manuscripts prepared and written by commercial entities (fake-paper factories, “paper mills”) on behalf of researchers listed as authors on the manuscript do not meet SEISENSE’ policies and will not be considered for publication. SEISENSE will take proactive actions to reject suspicious manuscripts before peer review.
- Corresponding Author
The corresponding author takes primary responsibility for communication with the journal and editorial office during the submission process, throughout peer review, and during publication. The corresponding author is also responsible for ensuring that the submission adheres to all journal requirements including, but not exclusive to, details of authorship, study ethics and ethics approval, clinical trial registration documents, and conflict of interest declaration. The corresponding author should also be available post-publication to respond to any queries or critiques.
Requests to modify the author list after submission should be made to the editorial office using the Authorship Change form.
- Authorship Disputes
To manage authorship disputes, editors should refer to the flowcharts from COPE and “How to spot authorship problems.” Authorship disputes will often need to be referred to institutions if the authors cannot resolve the dispute themselves.
- Editors and journal staff as authors
Editors or board members are not allowed to publish their own scholarly work in the journal.
Citation and reference to appropriate and relevant literature is an essential part of scholarly publishing and is a shared responsibility among all involved (authors, editors, peer reviewers). Authors should not engage in excessive self-citation of their own work. Editors and peer reviewers should not ask authors to add citations to their papers when there is no strong scholarly rationale for doing so. The issue of inappropriate citation (including citation stacking and citation cartels) has been discussed by COPE, and COPE have produced a discussion document on citation manipulation with recommendations for best practice.
Material submitted to SEISENSE must comply with the following policies to ensure ethical publication of academic work:
- Original content and duplicate publication: SEISENSE only publishes original content. Authors confirm the submission of original content in the Terms & Conditions upon submission. Manuscripts submitted to SEISENSE must not have been previously published or be under consideration for publication elsewhere, either in whole or in part. If an article has been previously submitted for publication elsewhere, SEISENSE will only consider publication if the article has been definitively rejected by the other publisher(s) at the point of submission to SEISENSE.
- Fabrication and falsification: SEISENSE opposes both the fabrication of data or images (i.e. fake or made up data) and falsification of data or images (i.e. the intentional misrepresentation or deceptive manipulation of data).
- Redundant publication: SEISENSE considers the submission and publication of very similar articles based on the same experiment or study to be unethical.
- Plagiarism: Plagiarism occurs when an author attempts to present previously published work as original content. Every manuscript submitted to SEISENSE is screened for textual overlap by the software Turnitin. Manuscripts found to contain textual overlap are not considered for publication by SEISENSE. For more details on what constitutes plagiarism, please see Plagiarism and Duplication.
We reserve the right to contact the affiliated institutions of authors who have not acted according to good research and publication practices.
- Plagiarism and Duplication
SEISENSE checks all submitted manuscripts for plagiarism and duplication and publishes only original content. Those manuscripts where plagiarism or duplication is shown to have occurred will not be considered for publication in a SEISENSE journal. It is required that all submissions consist of content that has not been published previously. In accordance with COPE guidelines, we expect that “original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.” This condition also applies to an author’s own work.
- Theses and Dissertations
SEISENSE allows the inclusion of content that first appeared in an author’s thesis so long as this is the only form in which it has appeared, is in line with the author’s university policy and can be accessed online. If the thesis is not archived online, it is considered original, unpublished data and is subject to the unpublished data restrictions of some article types. Inclusion of material from theses or dissertations should be noted in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript AND cited accordingly in the reference list.
- Conferences, Proceedings, and Abstracts
Manuscripts that first appeared as conference papers must be expanded upon if they are to be considered as original work. Authors are required to add a substantial amount of original content in the form of new raw material (experiments, data) or new treatment of old data sets which lead to original discussion and/or conclusions, providing value that significantly exceeds the original conference version. As a rule of thumb, at least 30% of the content must be original. Authors submitting such work are required to:
- Seek permission for reuse of the published conference paper if the author does not hold the copyright (proof of permission should be submitted as supplementary material or sent to firstname.lastname@example.org with the manuscript ID upon submission);
- Cite the conference in the Acknowledgements section, or the references section if applicable.
SEISENSE does not accept manuscript submissions that are exact translations of previously published work.
SEISENSE recognizes our responsibility to correct scientifically relevant errors in previously published articles. Corrections can be submitted if:
- A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading; OR
- There is an error in a figure that does not alter the conclusions; OR
- There is an error in statistical data not altering conclusions; OR
- There are mislabeled figures; OR
- The wrong slide of microscopy was provided; OR
- If the author/contributor list is incorrect when a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included.
For those articles which have been published in an issue, a corresponding correction statement should be published and linked to the original article. In these cases, the changes should usually not be made directly to the article.
If the error was introduced during the publishing process, the SEISENSE Production Office should be contacted. All these corrections are subject to the approval of the editorial office.
SEISENSE will be committed to playing their part in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record, therefore on occasion, it may be necessary to retract articles. COPE has published guidelines for retracting articles which suggest that journals should consider publishing retractions for articles when:
- They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (e.g. of data) or falsification (e.g. image manipulation)
- It constitutes plagiarism
- The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
- It contains material or data without authorization for use
- Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (e.g. libel, privacy)
- It reports unethical research
- It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
- The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest or conflict of interest that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
SEISENSE’s policy for handling retractions and circumstances under which these options will be considered is available online. All retractions are reviewed and approved by the Ethical Committee (EC) formed by SEISENSE on case to case bases.
The title of a Retraction will include the words “Retraction” as well as information to identify the article that it refers to. It will be published on a numbered page (electronic and print if print versions available) and will be listed in the journal’s table of contents. It will cite the original article and link electronically with the original electronic publication wherever possible. It will enable the reader to identify and understand why the article is being retracted. It will be in a form that enables indexing and abstracting services to identify and link to original publications and be free to access.
SEISENSE remains neutral with regard to published territorial descriptions, maps, and author affiliations. All territorial claims are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, the publisher, the editors, or reviewers.
Details of all funding sources must be provided in the funding section of the manuscript, including grant numbers, if applicable. All SEISENSE articles are published with open access under the CC-BY Creative Commons attribution license. Articles published with SEISENSE automatically fulfill or exceed the requirements for open access mandated by many institutions and funding bodies, including the National Institutes of Health, the Medical Research Council, Research Councils UK, and the Welcome Trust. SEISENSE submits funding data to the Open Funder Registry, which is a funder identification service from CrossRef resulting from collaboration between scholarly publishers and funding agencies.
COPE is a non-profit organization dedicated to promoting integrity in research and its publication. COPE serves more than 12,000 members around the world with practical guidelines, resources, e-learning, seminars, and much more. An overview of COPE’s activities is provided here. COPE has defined a set of recommended core practices that are applicable to all involved in publishing scholarly literature: editors and journal teams, publishers and institutions. The rationale for the development of the core practices is explained here. We at SEISENSE also referred to specific COPE resources, amongst the many ethics resources that are available, where relevant throughout these guidelines. COPE also provides editors with independent advice from other editors about difficult cases via the COPE Forum. Through its case archive, a searchable database of cases from 1997 onwards, COPE enables editors to learn from similar cases. In addition, there are other resources available for use. The US Office of Research Integrity has published “Managing Allegations of Scientific Misconduct: A Guidance Document for Editors”. The European Association for Chemical and Molecular Sciences (EuCheMS) has published “Ethical Guidelines for Publications in Journals and Reviews.”
All research submitted to SEISENSE for consideration must have been conducted in accordance with COPE guidelines. SEISENSE reserves the right to reject any manuscript that editors believe does not uphold high ethical standards, even if authors have obtained ethical approval or if ethical approval is not required. SEISENSE encourages authors to follow the ARRIVE guidelines for the design, analysis, and reporting of scientific research.
- Studies Involving Human Subjects
For manuscripts reporting studies involving human participants, including but extending beyond medical research, SEISENSE will require a statement from authors to confirm that the appropriate ethical approval has been received, along with details of the approving ethics committee, and that the study conforms to recognized standards, see for example, Declaration of Helsinki; US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects; European Medicines Agency Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice or the Ethical Review Methods for Biomedical Research involving Humans adopted by the National Health and Family Planning Commission of the People’s Republic of China.
Studies involving human participants must be performed in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines, with the appropriate institutional ethics committee's prior approval and informed written consent from all human subjects involved in the study including for publication of the results.
In cases where manuscripts may involve potentially vulnerable groups and, therefore, where informed consent may have required particular attention from the study authors and the institution where the work took place, we recommend particular care from journal teams to ensure expected standards have both been met and are described in the articles they publish. The Icelandic Human Rights Center presents a list containing twelve examples of vulnerable groups: “1) women and girls; 2) children; 3) refugees; 4) internally displaced persons; 5) stateless persons; 6) national minorities; 7) indigenous peoples 8) migrant workers; 9) disabled persons; 10) older adults; 11) HIV positive persons and AIDS victims; 12) Roma/Gypsies/Sinti; and 13) lesbian, gay and transgender people.” The Economic and Social Research Council in the UK provides further advice about research on potentially vulnerable people.
To ensure that informed consent has been obtained, SEISENSE journals will require authors to confirm this upon submission, and require that this information be included in a statement to this effect within their manuscript. Note that consent to participate in research is separate from consent to publish. It is necessary to obtain consent to publish if there is any possibility that information shared may identify an individual person, and document that this has been given within the manuscript. Consent forms do not need to be submitted with the manuscript, but researchers should provide necessary details if requested to do so by the journal.
In order to protect subject anonymity, identifying information will not be included in the manuscript unless such information is absolutely necessary for scientific purposes AND explicit approval has been granted by the subjects.
- Inclusion of Identifiable Human Data
SEISENSE follows the ICMJE recommendations on the protection of research participants, which state that patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. We require nonessential identifiable details to be omitted from all manuscripts and written informed consent will be required if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained.
It is the responsibility of the researchers and authors to ensure that these principles are complied with, including the obtaining of written informed consent for publication of any potentially identifiable data or images.
Written informed consent can be documented on a form provided by an institution or ethics committee, and it must clearly state how the identifiable data will be used. SEISENSE does not require consent on any specific template and the author can use any form of consent which meets the ICMJE recommendations. We consider it to be the author's duty to encourage participants or patients whose consent for publication is required to read and understand the ICMJE guidelines, for their information prior to completing the consent form. Participants will also be encouraged to ask any questions and to ensure they are comfortable before they sign the consent form.
The completed consent forms should be stored by authors or their respective institutions, in accordance with institutional policies. Completed forms should not be included with your SEISENSE submission. However, consent forms should be made available upon request from the editor or editorial office, during the review process or post-publication.
The determination of what constitutes identifiable data lies with our editors and editorial office staff, and manuscripts may be rejected if the required consent documents cannot be provided. Please note that written informed consent for publication is required for all case report articles where the patient or subject is identified or identifiable. Information regarding participant/patient consent for publication of identifiable data should be provided within the submission system.
- Clinical Trials
The World Health Organization defines a clinical trial as "any research study that prospectively assigns human participants or groups of humans to one or more health-related interventions to evaluate the effects on health outcomes". In accordance with the Clinical Trial Registration Statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMEJ), all clinical trials must be registered in a public trials registry at or before the onset of participant enrolment. To meet the requirements of the ICMJE and SEISENSE, clinical trials can be registered with any Primary Registry in the WHO Registry Network or an ICMJE approved registry.
Clinical trial reports should be compliant with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) by including a flow diagram presenting the enrolment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and data analysis with the number of subjects for each and taking into account the CONSORT Checklist of items to include when reporting a randomized clinical trial.
- The information on the clinical trial registration (Unique Identifier and URL) must be included in the abstract.
The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ definition of conflicts of interest is as follows: “A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.”
All authors and members of SEISENSE Editorial Boards are required to disclose any actual and potential conflicts of interest at submission or upon accepting an editorial or review assignment.
The SEISENSE review system is designed to guarantee the most transparent and objective editorial and review process.
Failure to declare competing interests can result in the rejection of a manuscript. If an undisclosed competing interest comes to light after publication, SEISENSE will take action in accordance with internal policies and Committee on Publication Ethics guidelines.
Anything that can be perceived as a potential conflict of interest should be disclosed within the Pre-Review discussion section, during submission.
- Journal editors, board members, and staff who are involved with decisions about publication should declare their interests.
- Editors should publish authors’ conflicts of interest whenever they are relevant, or a statement of their absence. If there is doubt editors should opt in favor of greater disclosure.
- If authors state that there are no conflicts of interest, editors should publish a confirmation to this effect.
- Editors should manage peer reviewers’ conflicts of interest. An invitation to review a manuscript should be accompanied by a request for the reviewer to reveal any potential conflicts of interest and a request for the peer reviewer to disqualify or recuse themselves when these are relevant.
- When editors, members of editorial boards, and other editorial staff are presented with papers where their own interests may be perceived to impair their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should withdraw from discussions, deputize decisions, or suggest that authors seek publication in a different journal.
COPE has published flowcharts that illustrate a suitable process for investigations of suspected undisclosed conflicts of interest.
- What Should I Disclose?
As an author, disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest should be done during the submission process. Consider the following questions and make sure you disclose any positive answers:
- Did you or your institution at any time receive payment or services from a third party for any aspect of the submitted work?
- Do you have financial relationships (such as commercial affiliation/employment, funding, intellectual property, etc.) with entities that could be perceived to influence, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote in the submitted work?
- Do you have any patents and/or copyrights, whether pending, issued, licensed, and/or receiving royalties related to the research?
- Do you have other relationships or activities that readers could perceive to have influenced, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote in the submitted work?
If you failed to disclose potential conflicts of interest during submission, or in case of doubt, please contact the SEISENSE Editorial Office at email@example.com with the details of the potential conflicts as soon as possible.
- Editors and Reviewers?
Handling editors and reviewers will be asked to consider the following potential conflicts of interest before accepting any editing or review assignment:
§ Are any of the authors a spouse or significant other, a member of the same family or a very close personal friend? Review Editors should also not be a member of the same family as the handling editor.
§ Are you currently hosting or have hosted a SEISENSE Research Topic with any of the authors within the past 2 years?
§ Are you currently collaborating or have you collaborated on a research project or a publication with any of the authors within the past 2 years?
§ Are you currently collaborating or have you collaborated with any of the authors as an advisor or in any other direct supervisory capacity in the past five years?
§ Are you currently collaborating or have you collaborated with any of the authors as a student or in any other direct subordinate capacity in the past five years?
§ Note: Review Editors should not accept assignments if they have a close professional relationship with the handling editor, which in their view could affect the objectivity of the review.
§ Are you affiliated with the same institution as any of the authors? If so, has this resulted in interactions, collaborations or mutual interests with the authors that would compromise your impartiality in conducting this review?
§ Are you a current member of a committee or department that coincides with an affiliation with any of the authors?
§ Do you have a business or professional partnership with any author?
§ Do you have financial interests or business relations with any organization involved in this research or in the preparation of the manuscript?
§ Do you have any financial interest or competing interests in the content of the manuscript that might affect your ability to perform an objective review?
SEISENSE is committed to open science and open data; we require that authors make available all data relevant to the conclusions of the manuscript. We aim to achieve the best community standards regarding data availability, ensuring increased levels of transparency and reproducibility in our published articles.
Our policies on data availability are informed by community-driven standards, which SEISENSE endorses, such as the Transparency and Openness (TOP) guidelines, and the joint declaration of data citation principles produced by FORCE 11.
- Availability of Materials
Authors are required to make all materials used to conduct their research available to other researchers. Research materials necessary to enable the reproduction of an experiment should be clearly indicated in the Materials and Methods section. Relevant materials such as protocols, analytic methods, and study material should preferably be uploaded to an online repository providing a global persistent link/identifier. If this is not possible, authors are strongly encouraged to make this material available upon request to interested researchers.
- Availability of Data
SEISENSE requires that authors make the “minimal data set” underlying the findings described and used to reach the conclusions of the manuscript, available to any qualified researchers. The data should be FAIR—findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable—so that other researchers can locate and use the data. However, exceptions are granted if data cannot be made publicly available for legal or ethical reasons.
To comply with best practices in their field of research, authors are required to make certain types of data available to readers at the time of publication in specific, stable, community-supported repositories.
- Exceptions Related to Availability of Data
We strongly encourage sharing the maximal amount of data; however, where ethical, legal or privacy issues are present the data should not be shared. In cases where some or all data cannot be shared for legal, ethical or privacy restrictions, the authors should make these limitations clear in the Data Availability Statement at the time of submission.
Possible limitations to making data publicly available include patient confidentiality and participant privacy. Authors should ensure that the data shared are in accordance with the ethical consent provided by participants on the use of confidential/identifiable human data. We require that the authors demonstrate that the publication of such data does not compromise the anonymity of the participants or breach local data protection laws.
In situations where access is restricted to protect confidential or proprietary information, authors are required to explain the restrictions on the dataset and make the data available upon request with permission of the third party. The Data Availability Statement should include all necessary contact information to request access to the dataset.
- Data Citation Guidelines
Authors are encouraged to cite all datasets generated or analyzed in the study.
- Data Availability Statements
Data availability statements are required for all articles published with SEISENSE. During the submission process, authors will be asked to detail the location of the raw data underlying the conclusions made in the manuscript, and whether it will be made available to other researchers following publication. Authors will also be asked for the details of any existing datasets that have been analyzed in the manuscript. These datasets should be cited in accordance with our data citation guidelines.
A statement will be automatically generated using the information provided in the submission form; however, manuscripts containing incomplete or incorrect statements will be prevented from entering the review process.
Examples of Acceptable Statements
- Original datasets are available in a publicly accessible repository:
The original contributions presented in the study are publicly available. This data can be found here: [link/accession number].
- Existing datasets are available in a publicly accessible repository:
Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: [link/accession number].
- Information for existing publicly accessible datasets are contained within the article (e.g. for studies using greater than 10 accession numbers):
The datasets presented in this study can be found in online repositories. The names of the repository/repositories and accession number(s) can be found in the article/supplementary material.
- All relevant data is contained within the article:
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.
- Restrictions apply to the datasets:
The datasets presented in this article are not readily available because [VALID REASON]. Requests to access the datasets should be directed to [text input].
- Data has been obtained from a third party:
The data analyzed in this study was obtained from [SOURCE], the following licenses/restrictions apply [RESTRICTIONS]. Requests to access these datasets should be directed to [NAME, EMAIL].
- Datasets are available on request:
- The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
SEISENSE Journal of Management allows all versions (Submitted version, accepted version, published version (Version of Record) to be deposited in an institutional or another repository of the author’s choice without embargo. All articles published in SEISENSE receive a DOI and are permanently published.
In only special circumstances, Authors can revise, change and update their articles by publishing new versions, which are added to the article’s history; however, the individual versions, once published, cannot be altered or withdrawn and are permanently available on the SEISENSE website. SEISENSE participates in the CrossMark scheme, a multi-publisher initiative that has developed a standard way for readers to locate the current version of an article. By applying the CrossMark policies, SEISENSE is committed to maintaining the content it publishes and alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.
Clicking on the CrossMark logo (at the top of each SEISENSE article) will give you the current status of an article and direct you to the latest published version.
SEISENSE follows the COPE guidelines about complaints and appeals. If you wish to appeal an editorial decision or make a complaint you should contact the editorial office (firstname.lastname@example.org).