Search

Peer Review Process – The International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research -MIYR

1. Overview

All submissions to the Journal undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review following standardized procedures to ensure the highest academic quality. The identities of both authors and reviewers are fully anonymized to maintain objectivity.

2. Initial Evaluation

Submitted manuscripts first undergo an initial evaluation to check compliance with the journal guidelines.
Manuscripts not meeting the requirements may be returned for revision or desk rejected if they are out of scope or otherwise unsuitable.

3. Double-Blind Review Requirements

Authors:

  • Must remove names, affiliations, and any identifying details from the manuscript and document metadata (e.g., Microsoft Office properties). Author information should only be entered in the OJS metadata fields to ensure proper management and communication with the editorial office.
  • In references and footnotes, use “Author” and publication year instead of personal or institutional identifiers.
  • Failure to anonymize manuscripts may result in delayed review or rejection.

Reviewers:

  • Submitted review files must not contain information that could reveal the reviewer’s identity.
  • Authors cannot recommend reviewers; the editorial office assigns reviewers independently.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Suitability of content and originality
  • Significance of the research topic to theory and practice
  • Creativity and logical consistency
  • Potential impact on education, policy, or society
  • Appropriateness and rigor of methodology, data analysis, and interpretation
  • Contribution and importance within the field
  • Clarity, accuracy, and professionalism in language and composition

5. Decision-Making Process

  • Reviewers provide detailed feedback to the editorial office within the assigned timeframe.
  • The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewers’ assessments and recommendations.
  • Manuscripts authored by the Editor-in-Chief or editorial board members are handled by alternative editors to avoid conflicts of interest.

6. Review Timeline

  • The total time from submission to final editorial decision is approximately 7–8 weeks.
  • The reviewer evaluation period is typically 4 weeks.
  • The journal strives to maintain a rapid review process without compromising quality.

7. Publication Ethics and Plagiarism

  • Authors, reviewers, and editors must uphold academic honesty, transparency, and confidentiality.
  • All manuscripts are checked using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin, iThenticate) before peer review.
  • Manuscripts with unoriginal material without proper citation may be rejected or returned for revision, and severe cases may lead to restrictions on future submissions.
  • The journal follows COPE guidelines for handling plagiarism and other ethical violations.