Information For Authors

Manuscript can be submitted by registering and logging in to this link


Editorial Process of the SPJRD

The SPJRD publishes articles covering a range of academic disciplines reflecting the RDE agenda of the University, as it continuously responds to the needs of the Mindanao region.

Submission of papers to the Journal requires that the Author fully understand the editorial criteria and processes involved in the whole publication process. 


General Guidelines: Initial Screening and Criteria for Publication

Submitted manuscripts are first screened by the editorial staff for completeness and to determine if the manuscript meets the general criteria or standard set by the Journal. An author's cognizance of these criteria would help him/her assess the draft meant for submission:

  • The work reports original research (the research data, analyses, results and conclusions must not have been published or submitted elsewhere or under consideration)

  • It holds discernible importance to the context of the Mindanao region's development needs

  • The work shows novel or striking findings whose immediate or far-reaching implications can't be disregarded and hence should be made public

  • The findings and conclusions derived provoke prospective interest among readers of various disciplines

In light of the criteria set above, the editional team pay special attention to the readability of the material. Especially for authors in highly technical disciplines, it is encouraged that they write the article in a way that enables nonspecialist readers to understand.


How to Submit an Article

All authors are required to submit their manuscripts through the SPJRD's Open Journal System (OJS) platform, the Journal's online manuscript submission, tracking and revision system. Authors register for an account to the site.

The author registers using his complete name to log in and secure a password. The author makes use of the system both in submitting and revising the paper until it successfully passes the review process and is assigned its volume and issue numbers.


What Happens After Submission and Acceptance of Draft

The editorial team copyedit the material inspecting it for language clarity, brevity of methodological discussion, appropriateness of length, and overall subscription to the sections and format required by the Journal.

This copyedited version of the material then undergoes a double-blind review process involving external reviewers. 



The author receives from the OJS system an email prompt that his/her recent revised version of the paper is ready for publication. A volume and issue number shall be assigned to the article, this phase indicating the full completion of the work entailed in the editorial process. A hard copy of the issue of the Journal is sent to the author while a soft copy is deposited in and is accessible on the SPJRD's OJS page.


Peer Review Policy and Peer Review Process

Papers that meet the general criteria of the Journal are sent for formal double-blind review. The OJS has a system that shall indicate to the author that his/her paper is under review.

The SPJRD involves qualified reviewers in corresponding fields. These experts review articles guided by a checklist of revision recommendations and conduct the review process given a specified duration. When the peer review reports are ready, the author obtains a copy, prompted by the web-based system. The author goes through a maximum duration of 3-month revision process improving the content taken from peer review feedback.

The initial peer review report is expected to be submitted by the reviewer three (3) weeks after securing a copy of the draft online. In certain cases, a 2nd/further review may be deemed necessary. Overall, manuscript refinement involving peer review report/s and author revisions should be covered within 3 months duration.

The following are possibilities of reviewers' decision/advice:

1. ACCEPTABLE content in present form (will progress to publication)

2. ACCEPTABLE, advised to revise to address minor concerns in the manuscript's content, no further review needed

3. ACCEPTABLE, advised to revise to address major concerns in the manuscript's content, further review needed

4. REJECTED and returned to the author, but can be re-submitted after doing further work [Note: In such case, the article upon new submission follows the same process]

5. REJECTED due to lack of conceptual/methodological advancement and has serious problems in its interpretation/analyses


Selection of Peer Reviewers

To ensure that authors who submit manuscripts to the SPJRD receive expert advice, peer reviewer selection follows a set of minimum criteria. The Journal guarantees its readers that materials published are of high quality, hence the judicious selection of manuscript reviewers.

Factors considered are the following:

1. Knowledge and experience in the discipline.

2. Research publication in the discipline.

3. Experience in the peer review process.

4. Recommendation(s) from practitioners/researchers in the discipline or from other editors.

The editorial team notifies a potential reviewer and asks for his or her availability for the duration of the review/revision process. This ensures prompt review as commitment is given by the reviewer for said duration. The peer reviewer must also understand that manuscripts have to be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers' identities are not released to authors, and vice versa. The editorial team remind reviewers not to identify themselves to the authors; similarly, authors should not approach or seek ways to determine their reviewers' identities.


Publication Ethics

One of the major thrusts of USeP as a research university is to publish quality papers. The integrity of the content published is a crucial point and should be ensured during the whole course of the editorial process. All the actors involved in the production of the Journal authors, editorial team members and Publication Unit staff - are expected to fully adhere to the policy regarding publication ethics and malpractice.



The USeP Journal or the Southeastern Philippines Journal of Research and Development must be original and adhere to high scientific (content) and technical (i.e. language, artwork) standard. International codes and nomenclatures [for example the international codes of zoological (living and fossil animals) and botanical (algae, fungi and plants) nomenclatures] should be strictly and carefully followed.


Copyright and Authorship

Authors who wish to publish in the SPJRD shall accept the following conditions:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the SPJRD right of first publication.

2. Authors are free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in SPJRD.

3. Authors should not post their submitted work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on personal websites) prior to or during the submission process, as this may cause nomenclatural problems.

4. The present paper submitted to the SPJRD should not have been submitted to another journal, nor will it be in the next one month after initial submission to SPJRD. All co-authors must be aware of the present submission.

5. When authorship is shared, the name that appears as primary/lead author (or first mention in the series of names) is the one that meets these editorial requirements:

     5.1.      Submits the paper through the SPJRD's OJS site - its online manuscript submission, tracking and revision system. Here, he or she acquires an exclusive login name and password.

     5.2.      With his/her name registered in the system, the author makes use of its functions during the whole editorial and review process, carrying out the revisions until the article is tabled for publication (assigned its volume and issue numbers).

     5.3.      Authors are credited if they drafted the article and revised it critically for important intellectual and editorial content. Authors are ones sought by the Journal editorial team to give final approval of the version to be published. Usually, the registrant to the system takes the lead writer/authorship of the article.

6. The lead author takes responsibility in ensuring that all co-authors are aware of and agree to the contents of submission.

7. The lead author and co-authors agree with the copyright policy of the Journal.

8. Other entities (people, agencies) with participation in certain substantive aspects of the research project may be acknowledged in a footnote to the article title.

9. For student dissertations and theses with the same title as the one submitted for publication, the lead authorship is automatically assigned to the student. The dissertation or thesis adviser could be named co-author of the material upon publication.



Editorial Decision

At the end of the review process, the Publication Unit head, the Editor-in-chief, and the Associate Editor make the final decision of acceptance or rejection, based on the reports and recommendations of the reviewers.


Ethical Issues: Action of Editorial Board

The SPJRD editorial team shall exert all efforts to avoid unethical issues before publication; but anyone who suspects any form of malpractice connected to the submitted paper should immediately reach the editorial team through its official contact email Every suspicion of ethical issues, misconduct or conflict of interest shall be investigated by the editorial team, with the Editor-in-chief, Associate Editor and Publication Unit head as lead investigators.


a. The Editor-in-chief, Associate Editor and Publication Unit head shall spearhead the investigation.

b. Membership to the investigating body, besides the 3 lead investigators are members of the SPJRD Publication Board. Reviewers and authors are to provide feedback and suggestions to improve communication during the treatment of ethical issues.

c. The lead investigators shall contact both parties involved in the conflict and study their responses. No repressive action shall be decided without sufficient evidence of misconduct.

d. If the case involves another journal, its Editor-in-chief shall be contacted with both editorial teams doing the investigation and making a common decision to resolve the issue.

In resolving minor disputes or major commission of malpractice:

a. If the paper implicated has already been published, the decision of the investigating body will depend on the nature and severity of the problem:

        a1. If the dispute is only due to a difference of scientific point of view between the author and the complainant, the Journal may encourage debate. The complainant can publish a paper in SPJRD and the author of the first paper has the right to reply. These papers will follow the evaluation process and will be reviewed before any other editorial decision.

        a2. For minor issues, all persons involved in the decision and publication process are informed. If all parties agree, the publication of a corrigendum or addendum will be the solution.

        a3. In very serious cases (e.g. plagiarism), publication will be retracted. A Retraction Note shall appear in the next issue of the journal.

b. If the paper implicated has not yet been published, publication will be delayed until the issue is resolved. The manuscript is rejected when evidence shows that the author(s) has (have) committed malpractice.