JOURNAL OF STUDIES IN SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES (JSSSH) E-ISSN : 2413-9270A Journal of International Educational & Social Sciences Association (IESSA)
Editorial Process & Policy
- Responsibilities of the Editor
- Role of Associate Editors
- Peer-Review Process
- The decision of the Editor
- Manuscript Publication & Ethics
Responsibilities of the Editor
All manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Office pass through a meticulous review process. Two independent reviewers are engaged for a double-blind peer-review depending on a specific field of research and availability of the relevant reviewers. On the recommendation of the reviewers, a final decision is made by the Editor or by a member of the Editorial Board nominated by the Editor of the journal in case a conflict of interests can influence the decision. The Editor maintains the quality of entire publication procedures by coordinating with academic and administrative persons. He approves Associate Editors, Editorial Assistant/s, and new members of the Editorial Board. The Editor communicates with Associate Editors of the journal and Members of the Board where required.
Role of Associate Editors
The Associate Editor is responsible for the preliminary assessment and scrutiny of a manuscript in coordination with the Editor and/or Editorial Assistant/s. He evaluates the suitability of a manuscript given the stated aims and scope of the journal, observes the match between the author’s institutional affiliation and the area of research, and rejects or forward the manuscript for a thorough review process. The manuscript is passed through iThenticate Software to examine the level of plagiarism. The Associate Editor communicates with the Editor of the journal, authors, and reviewers working closely with the Editorial Assistant.
Two independent reviewers are assigned for blind-review of a received manuscript. The reviewers are selected from a team of external reviewers, or in certain situations, a member from the Editorial Board may be nominated for reviewing a manuscript if a conflict of interests prevails.
In extraordinary cases, the authors may be asked to nominate potential reviewer/s on the request of the Editor or Associate Editor of the journal. This is initiated only for a review of the manuscripts for which the journal could not avail of the relevant expert reviewers and has to seek assistance from the authors. Nevertheless, the Editorial Office is not bound to forward a manuscript to the nominated reviewers. In such a case, the Editorial Office will make sure that there is no conflict of interests before approving the nominated reviewer/s. Also, the reviewers are requested to disclose any conflict of interests before reviewing the manuscript. On the other hand, authors are allowed to suggest specific reviewer/s for the consideration to exclude them for reviewing their manuscript during submission.
The reviewers are approved by the Editor for inclusion in our team of reviewers on the bases of their volunteer services to the journal and their area of interest as per the scope of the journal. The reviewers should hold at least a PhD degree in the relevant area of social sciences and humanities, and they should have published articles in their field of expertise. An exception may be considered in specific situations.
The reviewers are requested to send their reviews within four weeks, along with the recommendation for an overall decision of acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection of the manuscript. Please find detailed information here. Those who receive a revision of a manuscript are given at least one week for reviewing the manuscript again and sending back to the Editorial Office. The reviewers can be given an extension if required.
The reviewers assess the quality of a manuscript by considering the indicators such as implications of the study, structure and presentation, originality, proficiency of English language, scientific rigor, and contribution of the research to a particular field of social sciences or humanities. More information can be found at the Review Process & Policy.
Please visit our page to read on Review Process & Policy.
The reviewers are recommended are to read ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR PEER REVIEWERS (ENGLISH) developed by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The decision of the Editor
The Editor of the journal makes a final decision of the publication of a manuscript after the review reports are received. Nevertheless, a member from the Editorial Board may be engaged if a conflict of interest occurs. The Editor makes sure that the nominated reviewers fit the type of manuscript assigned to them, and they have written a review that adequately addresses the criteria of evaluation. The Editor assesses the overall quality of the manuscript and/or review reports before making a final decision. The decision is conveyed to the author in terms of unconditional acceptance, acceptance with minor or major revision, or unconditional rejection. The Editor may or may not send a revised version of the manuscript to the reviewers depending on the need of re-reviewing and availability and willingness of the reviewers. Typically, the Editor does not advise more than two significant revisions for a manuscript.
We consider appeals on editorial decisions. The authors, reviewers, and editors have the right to appeal to the Editor of the Journal. The authors may appeal a rejection of their manuscript by presenting a detailed description of the justification as per the objections raised by the reviewer/s and/or the editorial office.
The decision made by the Editor is based on the recommendations reported by the reviewers. Nevertheless, the Editor has the right to disagree with the given recommendations in favor of or against the authors’ contribution on certain grounds. This ensures the autonomy and independence of the Editor of the journal, who is expected not to exploit it. The Editorial Office does not interfere in this decision-making process. In case of submission of a manuscript by the Editor, Associate Editor, Editorial Assistant or any of the members of the Editorial Board, the external reviewers are contacted for an unbiased and independent review of the manuscript. The final decision is made by another member of the Editorial Board, who is supposed to be a neutral and unbiased person and has no conflict of interests with the author/s.
After the final acceptance of the manuscript, it is processed through English editing and proofreading by the authors and published in the journal. The manuscript may subject to plagiarism tests again if substantial changes have been incorporated in the final draft.
Ethical Considerations for Publication
The journal adheres to ethical standards of publication and deals strictly with the inappropriate behavior of authors, editors, and reviewers according to the pre-determined guidelines. The Editorial Office is responsible for addressing the unethical issues as per the guidelines laid out by the journal. Regarding the issues on authorship, authors’ misbehavior, or ownership of the research data, the Editorial Office may seek help from an organization or institution to which the authors are affiliated.
The journal strictly adheres to Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement to ensure ethical standards in scholarly contributions.