PEER REVIEW POLICY OF INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE ARCHIVES (IJSSA)

Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Social Science Archives (IJSSA) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality, research integrity, and ethical publishing through a rigorous double-blind peer review process. The journal follows internationally recognized best practices to ensure that all manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and confidentially. Under the double-blind review system, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process, thereby minimizing potential bias and ensuring that editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, and contribution of the submitted work.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Associate Editor. This assessment determines whether the manuscript falls within the journal's aims and scope, complies with the submission guidelines, meets minimum standards of academic quality, and adheres to ethical publishing requirements. Manuscripts are also screened for plagiarism using appropriate similarity-detection software in accordance with the plagiarism policies of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan and internationally accepted publication ethics. Manuscripts that do not satisfy these preliminary requirements may be rejected without external review.

Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers possessing expertise relevant to the subject matter of the submission. Reviewers are selected from the journal's reviewer database, editorial board, and recognized national and international academic institutions based on their specialization, research experience, publication record, and familiarity with the manuscript's discipline. The Editorial Office also considers reviewer availability, previous review performance, and the absence of conflicts of interest before assigning a manuscript. Individuals with financial, institutional, collaborative, supervisory, or personal relationships with the authors are not invited to review the manuscript to ensure impartiality and independence.

Reviewer Qualifications

IJSSA appoints reviewers who demonstrate recognized expertise in their respective disciplines. Reviewers are generally expected to hold a doctoral degree or possess equivalent professional or research experience in the relevant field. Preference is given to individuals with a strong publication record in reputable peer-reviewed journals, active involvement in research, and prior experience in manuscript evaluation. Subject specialists, senior academicians, researchers, and professionals with demonstrated competence in social sciences and related disciplines may be invited to serve as reviewers. All reviewers are expected to adhere to the principles of confidentiality, objectivity, integrity, and professional ethics throughout the review process.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to comprehensive academic and scientific criteria, including:

• Originality and novelty of the research.
• Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal.
• Significance of the research problem and contribution to existing knowledge.
• Adequacy and currency of the literature review.
• Soundness of the theoretical or conceptual framework.
• Appropriateness of the research design and methodology.
• Validity, reliability, and quality of data collection and analysis.
• Interpretation and discussion of findings.
• Clarity, organization, and coherence of the manuscript.
• Accuracy of references and adherence to ethical standards.
• Practical, theoretical, or policy implications of the study.
• Overall quality, scholarly merit, and suitability for publication.

Reviewers provide constructive comments and clear recommendations to assist both the authors in improving their manuscripts and the editors in making informed publication decisions.

Editorial Decision

After receiving reviewers' reports, the Editor-in-Chief evaluates the recommendations and makes the final decision. Editorial decisions may include:

• Accept without revision.
• Accept with minor revisions.
• Major revisions required and resubmission.
• Reject.

Where reviewers' recommendations differ significantly, the editor may appoint an additional independent reviewer before reaching a final decision.

Revision Process and Revision History

Authors receiving requests for revision are required to address each reviewer comment systematically and submit a detailed response explaining how each observation has been addressed. Any recommendation not incorporated into the revised manuscript must be justified with appropriate academic reasoning. The Editorial Office maintains a complete revision history, including the original submission, reviewers' reports, authors' responses, revised manuscripts, editorial correspondence, and final decisions. This documentation ensures transparency, accountability, and consistency throughout the editorial process. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers, where appropriate, to verify that the required revisions have been satisfactorily completed.

Prevention of Repeated Reviews by the Same Reviewer

To promote diversity of expert opinion and minimize reviewer fatigue, IJSSA endeavors to avoid assigning the same reviewer repeatedly to manuscripts submitted by the same author(s). The Editorial Office maintains reviewer assignment records and monitors reviewer workload to ensure a balanced distribution of review responsibilities. While the original reviewer may be invited to evaluate a revised version of a manuscript for consistency and continuity, subsequent independent submissions from the same author(s) are ordinarily assigned to different qualified reviewers whenever possible. This practice helps maintain impartiality, broadens scholarly perspectives, and strengthens the credibility of the peer review process.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality regarding all submitted manuscripts and should not disclose, discuss, or use unpublished information for personal or professional benefit. Reviews should be objective, respectful, constructive, and supported by scholarly evidence. Reviewers must promptly declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest and decline review assignments whenever such conflicts could compromise impartiality. They are also expected to report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, falsification, unethical research practices, or any other form of publication misconduct observed during the review process.

Review Timeline

The Editorial Office endeavors to complete the peer review process in a timely manner while maintaining high standards of quality and fairness. Authors are regularly informed about the progress of their submissions. Although review duration may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript, the journal strives to communicate initial editorial decisions as efficiently as possible and encourages reviewers to submit their evaluations within the prescribed review period.

Commitment to Publication Ethics

IJSSA is committed to ensuring transparency, fairness, accountability, and academic integrity throughout the editorial and peer review process. Editorial decisions are based exclusively on the scholarly quality, originality, significance, methodological rigor, and ethical compliance of the submitted work without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, ethnicity, or political beliefs. Through its rigorous double-blind peer review system and adherence to internationally accepted publication ethics, the International Journal of Social Science Archives seeks to publish high-quality research that contributes meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge in the social sciences.