Peer Review Policy

The Social Science Journal for Advanced Research (SSJAR) follows a Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure that every submitted manuscript is evaluated fairly, objectively, and confidentially. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Initial Editorial Assessment

After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial assessment to verify that it falls within the journal's scope and meets the basic standards of originality, quality, and manuscript preparation. Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before entering the peer-review process.

Peer Review Process

Every manuscript that proceeds to peer review is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers who are selected on the basis of their academic qualifications, subject expertise, research experience, and publication record.

Reviewers are requested to assess the manuscript on the following criteria:

  • Originality and novelty

  • Scientific and technical quality

  • Research methodology

  • Accuracy of data and interpretation

  • Clarity of presentation

  • Relevance to the journal's scope

  • Significance of the research findings

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor may make one of the following editorial decisions:

  • Accept

  • Accept with Minor Revisions

  • Reconsider after Major Revisions

  • Reject

The final publication decision is made by the Editor after careful consideration of the reviewers' comments and the overall quality of the manuscript.

Review Timeline

SSJAR aims to complete the peer-review process within 15 to 45 days. The actual review period may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the time required for revisions. Where possible, authors are informed of the initial editorial decision within 8 to 15 days of manuscript submission.

Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests should submit a revised manuscript together with a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments within the time specified by the Editorial Office. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to maintain confidentiality and must not share, distribute, or use unpublished material for personal, academic, or commercial purposes.

Ethical Review

Reviewers are encouraged to report any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, unethical research practices, or conflicts of interest identified during the review process. Such concerns are evaluated confidentially by the Editorial Office before any editorial decision is made.

Final Acceptance

After a manuscript has successfully completed the peer-review process and all required revisions have been incorporated, the Editorial Office will issue the final acceptance decision. Authors may be requested to complete the necessary publication documentation before the article proceeds to production and online publication.