Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

American Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (AJSSH)

International Peer-Reviewed Open Access Journal

1. Purpose of Peer Review

American Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (AJSSH) follows a rigorous peer-review process to ensure the publication of high-quality, original, ethical, and academically sound research. Peer review is an essential part of scholarly publishing and helps maintain the integrity, credibility, and reliability of the academic record.

The purpose of peer review is to evaluate the originality, relevance, methodological quality, theoretical contribution, clarity, and scholarly significance of each manuscript submitted to the journal.

2. Peer Review Model

AJSSH uses a double-blind peer-review process. This means that the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. The journal applies this model to promote fairness, impartiality, and academic objectivity.

Each manuscript is normally reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field. In cases where reviewer reports differ significantly, the Editor may invite an additional reviewer or make an editorial decision based on the quality and strength of the available reports.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

After submission, each manuscript is first examined by the Editorial Office to determine whether it complies with the journal’s scope, formatting requirements, ethical standards, and publication policies.

At this stage, the manuscript may be checked for:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
  • Originality and contribution to knowledge;
  • Compliance with author guidelines;
  • Language quality and clarity of presentation;
  • Ethical approval, where applicable;
  • Similarity index and plagiarism concerns;
  • Completeness of references, tables, figures, and declarations.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be returned to authors for correction or rejected without external review.

4. Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, publication record, subject knowledge, and absence of conflicts of interest. The Editor ensures that reviewers are qualified to evaluate the scholarly quality and technical content of the manuscript.

Reviewer selection is based on:

  • Expertise in the manuscript’s subject area;
  • Previous review experience and academic standing;
  • Publication history in relevant disciplines;
  • Availability to complete the review within the required time;
  • Independence from the authors and their institutions;
  • Absence of personal, academic, financial, or professional conflicts of interest.

5. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to provide fair, objective, constructive, and confidential assessments of manuscripts. Their comments should help authors improve the quality of their work and assist editors in making informed publication decisions.

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts according to:

  • Originality and novelty of the research;
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope;
  • Clarity of research objectives and questions;
  • Appropriateness of methodology and research design;
  • Validity and reliability of findings;
  • Quality of analysis and interpretation;
  • Strength of discussion and conclusion;
  • Contribution to theory, practice, policy, or future research;
  • Accuracy and relevance of references;
  • Overall presentation, structure, and language quality.

Reviewers must keep all manuscript materials confidential and must not use unpublished information for personal advantage. If a reviewer identifies a conflict of interest, they should immediately inform the Editor and decline the review invitation.

6. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for managing the peer-review process fairly, transparently, and efficiently. Editorial decisions are based on the academic merit, originality, relevance, and quality of the manuscript, regardless of the authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, ethnicity, or political views.

Editors are responsible for:

  • Conducting initial editorial screening;
  • Selecting qualified and independent reviewers;
  • Ensuring confidentiality throughout the review process;
  • Evaluating reviewer comments objectively;
  • Making fair and timely editorial decisions;
  • Managing conflicts of interest;
  • Ensuring compliance with publication ethics;
  • Maintaining the academic quality of the journal.

7. Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the peer-review process within 3 to 5 weeks from the date the manuscript is sent to reviewers. However, the review period may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the need for additional expert evaluation.

Stage Estimated Time
Submission Acknowledgement 1–3 working days
Initial Editorial Screening 1–2 weeks
External Peer Review 3–5 weeks
Author Revision As requested by the Editor
Final Decision After revised manuscript evaluation

8. Editorial Decisions

After receiving reviewer reports, the Editor makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without further revision.
  • Minor Revision: The manuscript requires small corrections before acceptance.
  • Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial improvement and may be sent for further review.
  • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript has potential but requires significant revision before reconsideration.
  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s academic, methodological, ethical, or scope requirements.

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief or the designated handling editor.

9. Revision and Resubmission

Authors invited to revise their manuscripts must submit a revised version together with a detailed response letter explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed. Changes in the manuscript should be clearly highlighted or explained.

Revised manuscripts may be evaluated by the Editor or returned to the original reviewers for further assessment, depending on the extent of the revisions required.

10. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to AJSSH are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Reviewers must not copy, share, distribute, or use manuscript content before publication.

11. Conflicts of Interest

Editors and reviewers must declare any conflict of interest that could influence, or appear to influence, their judgment. Conflicts may be personal, professional, academic, financial, institutional, or competitive.

If a conflict of interest exists, the reviewer must decline the invitation, and the Editor must assign the manuscript to another qualified reviewer or handling editor.

12. Plagiarism and Research Misconduct

AJSSH has a strict policy against plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, and other forms of academic misconduct.

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism-detection software before being sent for peer review. Manuscripts found to contain unethical content may be rejected at any stage of the editorial process.

13. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that the decision was based on a misunderstanding, factual error, or procedural irregularity. Appeals must be submitted in writing with a clear explanation and supporting evidence.

The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may consult additional reviewers or editorial board members. The decision after appeal shall be considered final.

14. Recognition of Reviewers

AJSSH values the contribution of reviewers to maintaining the scholarly quality of the journal. Reviewers may receive formal acknowledgement or certificates of appreciation upon request, subject to journal policy and confidentiality requirements.

Commitment to Research Quality

Through a transparent, ethical, and rigorous peer-review process, AJSSH is committed to publishing research that contributes to academic excellence, social understanding, public policy, and global scholarly communication.