Review Process

• Initial Screening: The editorial team reviews relevance, originality, adherence to guidelines, and ethical compliance, including plagiarism checks.
• Reviewer Assignment: Manuscripts passing screening are sent to at least one independent subject expert.
• Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers assess manuscripts based on:
  • Originality and significance of the research
  • Clarity and coherence of presentation
  • Soundness of methodology and data analysis
  • Contribution to the field and journal scope
  • Ethical compliance in research and publication
• Reviewers’ Recommendations:
  • Accept – Suitable for publication with minor or no revisions.
  • Revise and Resubmit – Substantial revisions required before reconsideration.
  • Reject – Does not meet academic or ethical standards.

The editorial team carefully considers reviewer comments before making a final decision. However, the Editor-in-Chief holds final authority over acceptance or rejection.

Review Ethics and Confidentiality

• Ethical Standards: Reviewers must follow COPE peer review guidelines.
• Confidentiality: All manuscript details and communications must remain confidential. Sharing content with unauthorized parties, including AI tools like ChatGPT, is strictly prohibited.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential bias or conflicts of interest.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviews should be objective, respectful, and focused on improving the manuscript.

By maintaining a rigorous and ethical peer review process, SIJSS ensures the publication of high-quality research while upholding academic integrity.