Peer Review Policy

At the Innovations Journal of Humanities and Social Studies (IJHSS), the peer review process is designed to ensure scholarly integrity, fairness, and transparency in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Elsevier’s Publishing Ethics, and the MyCite Selection Criteria. The journal follows a double-blind peer review process in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation to maintain objectivity and impartiality.

1. Manuscript Submission and Initial Evaluation

All manuscripts submitted to IJHSS are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Manager to ensure compliance with the journal’s scope, author guidelines, and ethical standards.
Submissions that do not meet formatting or policy requirements will be returned to the corresponding author for correction within one week.
Each manuscript undergoes plagiarism screening using Turnitin, and only submissions with similarity levels below 20% are considered for further review. Papers exceeding this threshold are returned to authors for revision and resubmission.

2. Peer Review Assignment

Once a manuscript passes the initial evaluation, it is assigned to a Section Editor who assesses its relevance and quality. The Section Editor recommends at least two qualified reviewers with subject expertise to the Editor-in-Chief.
The Editor-in-Chief then appoints the reviewers and sends them a standardized review form designed by IJHSS to guide the evaluation process. Reviewers must confirm acceptance of the invitation before accessing the manuscript.

3. Review Procedure and Feedback

The peer review process is double-blind: reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors are not informed of the reviewers’ identities.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on originality, methodology, contribution to knowledge, and clarity of presentation.
They submit their reports and recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief within 2–3 weeks, choosing one of four options:

Accept
Minor Revision
Major Revision
Reject

If there is a significant discrepancy between reviewers’ recommendations, a third reviewer is invited to provide an independent assessment.

4. Revision and Resubmission

Authors receiving reviewer comments are expected to revise their manuscripts accordingly and submit both the revised version and a point-by-point response letter within two weeks.
Failure to meet this deadline may result in withdrawal of the manuscript, unless an extension is requested in advance.
Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and, if necessary, by the original reviewers to verify that all issues have been addressed satisfactorily.

5. Final Editorial Decision

After reviewing all reports and revisions, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision, which may be:

Accept for Publication
Accept with Minor Revisions
Major Revision Required
Reject

If both reviewers recommend rejection, the decision is final.
The Editor-in-Chief’s decision is based on academic merit, relevance, and adherence to ethical publishing standards.

6. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a formal request to the Editor-in-Chief, including detailed justification and a point-by-point response to reviewers’ comments.
Appeals are reviewed by the editorial board and, when necessary, by an additional reviewer.
All appeals are handled impartially, in line with COPE’s guidelines on ethical publishing practices.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Compliance

All submissions, reviews, and editorial communications are treated as strictly confidential.
Reviewers and editors are prohibited from disclosing or using unpublished materials for personal research.
All participants in the review process must declare any conflicts of interest and maintain integrity and fairness throughout the evaluation.

8. Archiving and Transparency

To maintain transparency and traceability, IJHSS stores peer review records within its editorial system and ensures the secure preservation of all manuscripts and reports.
The journal also adheres to Sherpa Romeo and LOCKSS/CLOCKSS standards for long-term digital preservation.

Summary

The IJHSS peer review process upholds the highest standards of academic publishing, ensuring that every accepted manuscript meets criteria of originality, ethical integrity, and scholarly contribution.
The journal’s procedures are fully aligned with the frameworks of COPE, Elsevier, and MyCite, guaranteeing international credibility and compliance with Scopus and Clarivate indexing standards.