Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

SIJoSI adheres to a double-blind peer review policy to maintain the highest publication quality level. All research articles published in the SIJoSI undergo a rigorous peer review procedure, which consists of the following fundamental components:

  1. SIJoSI uses a two-stage procedure: Your manuscript will first be evaluated by the editorial team for acceptability for publishing in the journal after the technical review. If appropriate, it will be given to one of the editors to handle the evaluation and decision-making process.
  2. If your submission fits SIJoSI's requirements and scope, your work will be assigned to an Editor. The editor will select and contact reviewers regarded as experts in their fields. Peer review is a volunteer service; therefore, it can take some time, but the editor will follow up with reviewers regularly if they don't respond immediately. The status will remain "Under Review" during this time.
  3. It is also possible that the Editor will determine that your submission does not satisfy the journal's standards or scope and will not be further evaluated. In such a condition, the editor will promptly tell you that your paper has been rejected and may suggest an alternative publication.

 

Peer review of referred papers:

Based on the reviews and editorial insights from the Reviewers, the SIJoSI editors will promptly determine whether to accept, reject, or seek adjustments to submitted manuscripts. Moreover, Editors have the option to seek additional evaluations as necessary. The authors will be notified when the Editors determine that additional review is necessary. The editor will evaluate submitted articles based on the topic and writing style described in the journal guidelines. To maintain academic quality requirements, all articles undergo double-blind peer review, in which the reviewer's and author's identities are concealed from each other during the review process. In brief, these are the steps:

  1. Manuscript Submission (by author).
  2. Manuscript Evaluation and Selection (by manager and editors). 
  3. Editors have the authority to immediately accept, reject, or evaluate submissions. Before further processing steps, each article undergoes a Turnitin plagiarism check. 
  4. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers).
  5. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewer's comments).
  6. Manuscript Revision (by author)
  7. If the Editor is satisfied with the revision, notification for acceptance (by the editor). 
  8. Galley proof and publishing process.

The peer-reviewing process is divided into rounds, with stages 1 through 5 considered the first round. The editor or editorial board weighs the suggestions made by the peer reviewers before arriving at the final decision. The most common decisions are the following:

  1. Accepted without any changes.
  2. Accepted with minor revisions, indicating that the manuscript is suitable for publication but requires some limited modifications to meet the necessary standards.
  3. It is accepted with major revisions, implying that the manuscript needs substantial changes before being reconsidered for publication.
  4. Rejected, usually occurs if the manuscript falls outside the journal's scope and aims, has significant technical or descriptive issues, or lacks clarity in presentation.