The Journal of Social Sciences and Educational Practices (JSSEP) follows a double-blind peer review system to maintain academic integrity, fairness, and quality in all published work. Both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the process.

1. Submission and Initial Screening

After a manuscript is submitted, the Editorial Office conducts an initial evaluation to ensure that:

• The topic aligns with the journal’s aims and scope

• The manuscript meets formatting and ethical guidelines

• The content is original and free from plagiarism (checked through similarity detection software)

Submissions that do not meet these criteria may be returned for revision or declined at this stage.

2. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to two or more expert reviewers with relevant academic and research expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their specialization, experience in the subject area, their expertise, publication record, and familiarity with the manuscript’s subject matter.

All reviewers agree to the following principles:

• Maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscript content.
• Avoid sharing or citing material under review.
• Refrain from using information obtained during review for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers are expected to decline invitations when there is a conflict of interest or insufficient expertise.

3. Review Process

The reviewers assess the manuscript on the following aspects:

• Relevance and significance of the study

• Clarity of objectives and research questions

• Adequacy of references and literature grounding

• Soundness of methodology and data analysis

• Originality and contribution to the field

• Organization, language, and referencing style

Each reviewer submits a detailed report and recommends one of the following decisions:

• Accept

• Minor Revision

• Major Revision

• Reject

• Accept: Recommend only if the manuscript is ready for immediate publication with no further changes. Although, this is rare for a first submission.
• Minor revisions: Require small, quick changes such as formatting adjustments, word count reduction, or slight elaborations on findings.
• Revise and resubmit (Major revision): Require significant improvements that may take weeks or months. Examples include fixing methodological flaws, collecting more data, or conducting deeper analysis.
• Reject: The manuscript has fundamental flaws, for instance, in methodology or validity that ultimately make it difficult to see any potential in the manuscript.

Detailed and constructive feedback must accompany each recommendation.

4. Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief and Editor reviews the feedback and makes the final decision based on the reviewers’ reports. Authors receive constructive comments to improve their work.

5. Revision and Re-evaluation

Authors are expected to revise their manuscript according to reviewer suggestions. Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers or by the editorial team to ensure all concerns are addressed.

6. Final Acceptance and Publication

Once a paper is accepted, it undergoes copyediting, proofreading, and formatting before being published online. The corresponding author reviews the final proof before publication.

7. Review Timeline

The entire review process generally takes 4-6 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the paper.