Quality Control
Quality Control Standards for World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS) Books, Proceedings and Journals
Quality control in academic publishing represents the cornerstone of scholarly communication and credibility. For World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS) Books and Proceedings, establishing and maintaining rigorous quality standards ensures that published work meets the highest expectations of the international scientific community. These standards encompass every stage of the publication process, from initial submission through post-publication monitoring, and serve to protect the integrity of the research record while supporting authors in disseminating their work effectively.
Editorial Standards and Peer Review
The foundation of quality control begins with a robust peer review process. All submissions to World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society Books and Proceedings must undergo double-blind peer review, where neither the authors nor the reviewers know each other's identities. This approach minimizes bias and ensures that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific merit. Each manuscript should be reviewed by a minimum of two independent reviewers who possess appropriate expertise in the relevant subject area and have no conflicts of interest with the authors or the research presented.
The review process should be structured around clear criteria that assess originality, scientific rigor, methodological soundness, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the field. Reviewers must provide constructive feedback that helps authors improve their work, even when recommending rejection. The entire review process, from submission to initial decision, should ideally be completed within six to eight weeks to maintain momentum and respect authors' time commitments.
The editorial board itself must meet high standards of qualification and expertise. Editors should hold doctoral degrees or equivalent qualifications and demonstrate substantial expertise in their respective fields through their publication records and professional standing. The editorial board should reflect international representation to ensure diverse perspectives and global relevance. Clear conflict of interest policies must be established and enforced, requiring editors to recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have personal, professional, or financial connections to the authors or subject matter. Regular performance reviews of the editorial board help maintain standards and identify areas for improvement.
Content Quality and Manuscript Requirements
Every manuscript submitted for publication must represent original research or provide significant review contributions that advance understanding in the field. Authors must properly attribute and cite all sources, demonstrating thorough engagement with existing literature and acknowledging the foundations upon which their work builds. The methodology presented must be clear, reproducible, and appropriate for the research questions addressed. Results should be presented with appropriate statistical analysis and interpretation, supported by well-designed figures, tables, and supplementary materials that enhance rather than obscure understanding.
All submissions must comply with ethical research standards, including appropriate approval for studies involving human subjects or animals, informed consent procedures, and data protection measures. Before acceptance, manuscripts should undergo plagiarism screening using specialized software, with similarity indices generally required to remain below fifteen to twenty percent. This threshold accounts for common phrases, properly cited material, and methodological descriptions while flagging potentially problematic overlaps that require further investigation.
Language quality represents another crucial dimension of content standards. While recognizing that many authors work in English as a second or third language, manuscripts must be written in clear, professional English that effectively communicates the research to an international audience. Accepted manuscripts should receive professional copyediting to correct grammatical errors, improve clarity, and ensure consistency in terminology and style. Formatting must be consistent throughout the publication, adhering to "World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society" style guidelines for references, headings, figures, tables, and other elements. Technical terminology should be used appropriately, with definitions provided for specialized terms that may not be familiar to all readers within the broader disciplinary audience.
Publication Ethics and Research Integrity
Publication ethics form an essential component of quality control, protecting both the integrity of the research record and the trust that the scientific community places in published work. All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the research, whether in conception and design, data collection and analysis, or drafting and revising the manuscript. The corresponding author bears responsibility for ensuring that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agree to its submission. Authors must declare all funding sources and potential conflicts of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation.
"World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society" (WSEAS) maintains a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification. When allegations of misconduct arise, they must be investigated promptly and thoroughly, following established procedures that protect both accusers and accused while seeking to establish facts. When violations are confirmed, appropriate actions range from requiring corrections for honest errors to full retraction for serious misconduct, with notifications sent to the authors' institutions and relevant authorities. The retraction policy must be transparent and follow international guidelines, clearly marking retracted papers while maintaining their availability to preserve the research record and prevent republication attempts.
Copyright and licensing arrangements should be clearly communicated to authors before publication. Whether World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS) retains copyright, authors retain copyright with an exclusive license to publish, or publications are released under Creative Commons licenses, these terms must be unambiguous and legally sound. Data availability policies encourage transparency and reproducibility by requiring authors to specify how other researchers can access the data underlying their published findings, subject to ethical and legal constraints.
Technical Production Standards
The physical and digital quality of publications reflects directly on their credibility and usability. For printed books and proceedings, images must be reproduced at a minimum resolution of 300 dots per inch to ensure clarity and professional appearance. Paper quality, binding methods, and printing processes should be selected to produce durable volumes that will serve researchers for years. Color accuracy in figures and photographs must be maintained throughout the production process, and fonts should be clear and readable, with body text generally no smaller than ten points. Consistent margins, spacing, and layout contribute to a professional appearance and comfortable reading experience.
Digital publications require equal attention to technical quality. Documents should be produced in PDF/A format, an archival standard designed for long-term preservation and accessibility. All text should be searchable, with proper metadata embedded to facilitate discovery and citation. Each paper should receive a Digital Object Identifier that provides a permanent link regardless of changes in hosting or website structure. Where feasible, publications should meet Web Content Accessibility Guidelines at the AA level, ensuring that researchers with disabilities can access the content. Robust hosting infrastructure with regular backups protects against data loss and ensures continuous availability to the global research community.
Indexing, Metadata, and Discoverability
High-quality publications deserve maximum visibility within the research community. Complete and accurate bibliographic metadata enables effective indexing by databases and search engines. International Standard Serial Numbers for journals and proceedings, along with International Standard Book Numbers for books, should be obtained and properly registered. Integration with ORCID allows unambiguous identification of authors and helps them maintain comprehensive publication records. Subject classification using established taxonomies and carefully selected keywords improves discoverability by researchers searching for relevant literature. Abstracts must be comprehensive yet concise, providing sufficient information for researchers to determine the paper's relevance to their interests.
Submission to major indexing services represents a critical aspect of discoverability. World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society should pursue indexing in databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and discipline-specific indexes that serve the engineering, mathematics, and computer science communities. Whether publications follow open access, subscription, or hybrid models, the access arrangements should be clearly communicated. Membership in CrossRef enables participation in citation linking networks and provides valuable tools for tracking citations and detecting problematic publishing practices. Optimizing publications for academic search engines, maintaining active social media presence, and distributing content through academic networking platforms further enhance discoverability and impact.
Review Criteria and Decision Making
Clear acceptance criteria help maintain consistency in editorial decisions and set appropriate expectations for authors. Papers accepted for publication must demonstrate significant original contributions that advance knowledge or understanding in their field. This requirement does not mean that every paper must be groundbreaking, but each should add meaningfully to the existing literature rather than simply repeating what is already known. The methodology must be sound, with research designs appropriate to the questions asked and analytical approaches properly applied. Conclusions should follow logically from the results presented, acknowledging limitations and avoiding overstatement.
An adequate literature review situates the work within existing scholarship, demonstrating the authors' familiarity with relevant prior research and explaining how their contribution relates to and extends this foundation. Clear presentation and logical organization make the research accessible to readers, allowing them to follow the authors' reasoning and evaluate the evidence presented. Finally, the work must fall within the scope of World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society publications, addressing topics relevant to the engineering, mathematical, and computational sciences that form the organization's core focus.
Rejection criteria mirror these acceptance standards from the negative perspective. Papers lacking novelty or significance, even if technically correct, may not warrant publication in a competitive venue. Methodological flaws that undermine the validity of findings, whether in experimental design, data collection, statistical analysis, or interpretation, provide grounds for rejection. Ethical violations, from plagiarism to research misconduct, mandate rejection regardless of the scientific quality of the work. Poor presentation quality, while potentially correctable through revision, may be so severe as to make the work unpublishable in its current form. Finally, work that falls outside the scope of World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS) publications, however meritorious in its own right, should be redirected to more appropriate venues.
Quality Assurance Processes
Systematic quality assurance processes catch errors and ensure consistency before and after publication. In the final stages before publication, manuscripts should undergo a last plagiarism screening to verify that revisions have not introduced problematic overlaps. References should be checked for completeness and accuracy, ensuring that readers can locate the sources cited. Author affiliations should be confirmed, as institutional moves or errors in initial submissions sometimes create inaccuracies. A comprehensive formatting check verifies consistency in style, layout, and presentation throughout the volume. Professional proofreading catches typographical errors and remaining grammatical issues. Finally, authors must review and approve final proofs, accepting responsibility for the version that will be published.
Post-publication monitoring maintains quality over time and responds to issues that emerge after publication. Mechanisms for reader feedback allow the community to identify errors, raise concerns, or suggest improvements. Citation tracking reveals how the work influences subsequent research and identifies potentially problematic citation patterns. When errors are identified, correction procedures should be clear and efficient, publishing corrections or errata as needed. In cases of serious problems, retraction procedures protect the integrity of the research record. Regular impact assessment examines metrics such as downloads, citations, and altmetrics to understand how publications are being used. This information feeds into continuous improvement processes that refine standards and procedures over time.
Timeline and Workflow Management
Efficient workflows respect authors' time while maintaining quality standards. Upon submission, manuscripts should receive initial screening within one to two weeks to determine whether they meet basic requirements and fall within scope. Papers passing this screen proceed to peer review, which should typically be completed within six to eight weeks. Authors then receive reviewer feedback and, for papers requiring revision, are generally given four to six weeks to make changes and resubmit. The editorial team reviews revised manuscripts and makes final decisions within approximately two weeks of resubmission. Accepted papers then enter production, with publication occurring four to six weeks after acceptance, depending on the production queue and publication schedule.
Clear communication throughout this process reduces author anxiety and facilitates smooth workflows. Authors should receive acknowledgment of their submission within forty-eight hours, confirming receipt and providing a timeline for initial decisions. Regular status updates keep authors informed about the review process, especially if delays occur. Reviewer feedback should be transmitted promptly after decisions are made, providing clear and constructive guidance for revisions. Decision letters must be transparent about the reasons for acceptance, revision requests, or rejection. Throughout the process, responsive editorial support addresses authors' questions and concerns, maintaining positive relationships even when delivering disappointing news.
Performance Monitoring and Continuous Improvement
Systematic monitoring of publication performance enables evidence-based improvement of processes and standards. Tracking acceptance rates reveals whether standards are being applied consistently and appropriately. Unusually high acceptance rates may signal insufficient rigor, while unusually low rates might indicate overly stringent criteria or poor alignment between submissions and scope. Review turnaround times should be monitored to identify bottlenecks and ensure that reviewers and editors meet expectations for timely decisions. Citation impact analysis, while recognizing the limitations of bibliometric indicators, provides insights into how publications influence subsequent research. Author satisfaction surveys gather feedback directly from those who experience the publication process, identifying pain points and opportunities for improvement. Reviewer performance evaluation ensures that peer review remains constructive and thorough.
Regular reviews of standards and procedures keep World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society (WSEAS) publications competitive and aligned with evolving best practices. An annual comprehensive review examines all aspects of the quality control framework, considering feedback from authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Benchmarking against leading publishers in relevant fields identifies areas where World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society can improve or innovate. Training programs for editors and reviewers ensure consistent application of standards and introduce participants to new tools and techniques. Technology investments and process innovations streamline workflows, reduce errors, and enhance the author and reader experience. Stakeholder feedback is systematically collected and integrated into decision-making, ensuring that the publication program serves its community effectively.
Documentation, Compliance, and Transparency
Comprehensive record-keeping supports quality control, enables accountability, and protects against disputes. Complete submission records document when manuscripts were received, who handled them, and what actions were taken at each stage. All editorial decisions should be documented with explanations that can be reviewed if questions arise. Revision histories track changes between submission and publication, preserving the evolution of manuscripts through the peer review process. Complete correspondence files maintain records of all communications with authors, reviewers, and editors. All published materials should be archived securely, both in original formats and in preservation formats designed for long-term access. Retention periods should comply with legal requirements and professional standards, typically maintaining records for at least seven years after publication.
Transparency in editorial policies and practices builds trust with the research community and helps authors make informed decisions about where to submit their work. Editorial policies covering peer review, conflicts of interest, research ethics, and corrections should be publicly available and clearly written. Author guidelines should provide detailed, practical information about submission requirements, formatting standards, and what to expect during the review process. For journals considering open peer review or other innovations in transparency, the benefits and potential concerns should be carefully weighed. Editorial board membership, including editors' affiliations and expertise, should be publicly listed to demonstrate the expertise overseeing publications. Annual reports presenting statistics on submissions, acceptances, review times, and other metrics demonstrate accountability and provide valuable information to the community about publication trends and standards.
Implementation and Ongoing Management
These quality control standards should be formally adopted with a clear implementation date, ensuring that all stakeholders understand when the requirements take effect. An annual review cycle allows standards to be updated in response to changing technologies, evolving best practices, and community feedback, while providing sufficient stability for authors and editors to work within a consistent framework. The World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society Editorial Board bears ultimate responsibility for maintaining and enforcing these standards, with support from editorial staff, technical teams, and the broader leadership of the organization. Clear contact information for the editorial office enables authors, reviewers, and readers to ask questions, raise concerns, or provide feedback about the publication program.
By implementing these comprehensive quality control standards, World Scientific and Engineering Academy and Society Books and Proceedings will maintain their position as respected venues for scientific communication, serving the engineering, mathematical, and computational sciences communities with integrity, rigor, and commitment to excellence. These standards represent not a final destination but a living framework that will evolve with the needs of the research community and the changing landscape of scholarly publishing.
