Editorial & Peer Review Process
Double-blind peer review system ensuring quality and anonymity
Transparent evaluation process for scholarly excellence
Our Review Philosophy
The Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Invention employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the highest standards of academic quality and integrity. This system maintains complete anonymity between authors and reviewers throughout the evaluation process.
"Every submitted manuscript undergoes thorough evaluation by at least two independent experts in the field, ensuring unbiased assessment and constructive feedback for authors."
Double-Blind Review System
Ensuring impartiality through complete anonymity of authors and reviewers
Author Anonymity
- All author identifying information is removed before review
- Reviewers cannot see author names, affiliations, or contact details
- Self-citations are anonymized in the review copy
Reviewer Anonymity
- Reviewer identities remain confidential throughout the process
- Authors do not know who reviewed their manuscript
- Reviewer comments are anonymized before sharing with authors
The Review Process
Step-by-step journey of manuscript evaluation
Initial Screening
Editor reviews manuscript for alignment with editorial policies and minimum quality standards.
Double-Blind Assignment
Manuscript is anonymized and sent to two qualified reviewers who remain anonymous to authors.
Review Period
Reviewers evaluate manuscript based on originality, methodology, significance, and clarity.
Editorial Decision
Editorial Board makes final decision based on reviewers' confidential comments and recommendations.
Author Notification
Authors receive decision with anonymous reviewer comments and required revisions if applicable.
Revision & Final Decision
If revisions are requested, acceptance depends on satisfactory revision by authors.
Review Evaluation Criteria
Key aspects reviewers consider when evaluating manuscripts
Originality & Novelty
Contribution to field, new insights, and avoidance of duplication.
Methodological Rigor
Appropriate research design, data analysis, and methodological soundness.
Significance & Impact
Importance of findings and potential influence on field of study.
Clarity & Presentation
Logical structure, clear writing, and proper formatting.
Possible Editorial Decisions
Manuscript accepted for publication as is (rare)
Acceptable after minor clarifications or corrections
Requires substantial changes before reconsideration
Not suitable for publication in current form
Note: Acceptance after revision depends on whether authors can satisfactorily address reviewers' comments within the given timeframe.
Editorial Policies
Retraction Policy
Follows COPE guidelines for retraction of articles in cases of ethical violations or significant errors.
View COPE Retraction GuidelinesâPlagiarism Policy
All submissions undergo plagiarism screening; guilty authors may be barred from publishing for six months.
Confidentiality
Reviewers' comments remain confidential and are anonymized before sharing with authors.
Timeline
Initial decision typically within 4-8 weeks; revision period depends on extent of changes required.
Plagiarism Policy
All submitted manuscripts undergo thorough plagiarism screening using advanced detection software.
To report plagiarism concerns, please contact our editorial office with detailed information.
Authors found guilty of plagiarism may be barred from publishing in JHSSI for a period of six months.
Reporting Procedure: Send detailed complaint to ethics@jhssi.edu with evidence of plagiarism. All reports are investigated confidentially following COPE guidelines.
Commitment to Quality
Our double-blind peer review process ensures rigorous evaluation while maintaining fairness and anonymity. We are committed to providing constructive feedback to authors and maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing.