Peer Review Policy
Peer Review Process - Initial Evaluation and Decision
The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Manager of IJHSS will initially evaluate all submitted manuscripts to ensure they comply with the guide to authors' instructions for manuscript formatting, ethical policies of the journal, and scope of the publication. If a submission does not meet the manuscript formatting requirements, it will be returned to the corresponding author(s) for revision and resubmission within one week. The Editor-in-Chief will reject any submissions that do not adhere to the ethical policies and scope of the journal without further peer review. If a submission meets the journal's standards, it will undergo plagiarism checking using Turnitin. If the originality result is below 20%, the submission will be considered for peer-review. Otherwise, it will be rejected and returned to the author(s) for revision due to the presence of plagiarized content.
Peer Review
The Innovations Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (IJHSS) employs a double-blind peer review process in which authors and reviewers are unaware of each other's identities and affiliations throughout the process. After passing the initial screening, the manuscript will be assigned to a section editor who will evaluate its scientific eligibility and suggest potential reviewers who have expertise within the scope of the article to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief will then assign the manuscript to at least two independent reviewers, who may include a member of the editorial board or a suggested reviewer by the author(s). The assigned reviewers will decide whether to accept or reject the review invitation based on the manuscript's title and abstract.
The reviewers will assess the manuscript and provide their feedback and recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief within two to three weeks, indicating one of four possible actions: acceptance, acceptance with minor revisions, acceptance with major revisions, or rejection. In cases where there is a significant discrepancy in the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief will invite a third reviewer to provide a decision on the manuscript's acceptance, revision, or rejection. The initial round of the review process should be completed within 5-6 weeks, with a maximum timeframe of three months. If revisions are required, the corresponding author(s) will receive the reviewer's comments and the revised manuscript should be submitted to the editorial board within two weeks. Failure to meet this deadline will result in the manuscript being considered withdrawn, although an extension request can be made before the revision due date. Corresponding author(s) are expected to respond to the reviewer comments point-by-point and address any disagreements with the suggestions clearly. The Editor-in-Chief will review the revised manuscript to ensure that the revisions have been made in line with the reviewers' recommendations.
Final Decision
After considering all reviewer comments, the Editor-in-Chief will make a final decision, which will be one of the following:
- Publishing Decision:
If the Editor-in-Chief recommends “Publish,” the manuscript is accepted for publication.
Accept with Minor Revisions:
If the Editor-in-Chief recommends “Accept with Minor Revisions,” the authors are notified to prepare and submit a final copy of their manuscript with the required minor changes suggested by the reviewers. Only the Editor-in-Chief reviews the revised manuscript after the minor changes have been made by the authors. Once the Editor-in-Chief is satisfied with the final manuscript, the manuscript can be accepted.
- Major Revisions Required:
If major revisions are required, the submitted manuscript must go through further review after revision by the author(s) to consider for publication. Author(s) will be requested to resubmit the revision within two weeks, and the revised version will be sent back to the same reviewers. Once the revised manuscript is submitted, the Editor-in-Chief can then make an editorial recommendation, which can be “Publish” or “Accept with Minor Revisions” or “Reject.”
- Reject:
If the Editor-in-Chief recommends rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. Additionally, if two of the reviewers recommend rejecting the manuscript, the rejection is immediate. The editors have the authority to reject any manuscript due to the inappropriateness of its subject, lack of originality, or incorrectness of its results and no expansion of the current knowledge.
Author Appeals and Publication
If a submitted manuscript is rejected, the corresponding author(s) will be notified of the reason(s) for rejection by the Editor-in-Chief. However, the rejection decision can be appealed by sending an email to the Editor-in-Chief. In the appeal, the author(s) must provide a comprehensive justification, including point-by-point responses to the comments of the reviewers or editors. The Editor-in-Chief will review and discuss the appeal with the journal editors to provide a consultative recommendation on the manuscript. The recommendation may be acceptance, further peer-review, or maintaining the original rejection decision. It is important to note that a rejection decision is final and cannot be reversed.
If a manuscript is accepted, the Editor-in-Chief will send an acceptance letter to the corresponding author(s) along with the publication fees. The manuscript will then undergo the technical editing and design process before being sent to the publisher for publication.
