Guide for Reviewers

REVIEW GUIDELINES

Manuscripts are evaluated on the basis that they present new insight into the investigated topic and are likely to contribute to research progress or a change in policy or practice. It is understood that all authors listed on a manuscript have agreed to its submission. The signature of the corresponding author on the letter of submission signifies that these conditions have been fulfilled. Received manuscripts will initially be examined by the editorial office and those deemed to have insufficient grounds for publication may be rejected without external evaluation. Manuscripts not prepared in the advised style described below will be sent back to the authors for correction. The authors will be notified once the manuscript has been assigned to an Editor. The assigned manuscripts will be sent to 2-4 independent experts for scientific evaluation. The evaluation process commonly takes a month.

 

Under a double-blind peer-review system, MJSSDS invites two to three experts to evaluate—without exception—each submitted manuscript for scientific merit, originality, novelty, coherence, and clarity. The author shall be given an opportunity to revise the manuscript in accordance with the evaluation of the referees. The Editor-in-Chief will ultimately decide on its acceptability for publication based on the final recommendations of the referees and, where necessary, the members of the Editorial Board.

The review process will be closed immediately if none of the referees are recommending either the acceptance or further revision of the manuscript. This is to provide the authors with an opportunity to decide whether to have the manuscript resubmitted for another round of evaluation or even submitted to another journal.

To view reviewer instructions and access the review sheet, click on the "REVIEWER’S REPORT TO THE EDITOR"

 

Editorial Decision and Revision

The editorial office will communicate decisions to the authors regarding the following:

  • Accept in Present Form: The paper is accepted without any further changes.
  • Accept after Minor Revisions: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given five days for minor revisions.
  • Accept after Major Revisions: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point-by-point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised.
  • Reject: The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.

 

TO THE PEER REVIEWER

The process of peer review is vital to academic research because it means that articles published in academic journals are of the highest possible quality, validity, and relevance. Journals rely on the dedication and support of reviewers to make sure articles are suitable for publication.

Revisions can either be flagged as major or minor, depending on how much work is requested to be done on the manuscript. Please take a look at our step-by-step guide on how to write a peer-review report.

 

COMPETING INTEREST

Following the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), MJSSDS adheres to the highest ethical standard of publication. COPE has developed Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, to which editors and their editorial boards can refer for guidance. Read the COPE guidelines on their webpage, Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.