Peer Review Process

Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing high-quality research in the field of community nutrition, clinical nutrition, food safety, food and nutrition policy, health promotion, community-based interventions, as well as the social and environmental determinants of health. The peer review process is an essential step to assess the relevance and contribution of the paper to the focus of the journal. Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews uses a double-blind peer review method, which ensures that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous. The peer review process at journal involves the following 9 steps:

  1. Paper Submission The corresponding or submitting author submits the manuscript to the journal through our online submission system, which is powered by Open Journal System (OJS). For the convenience of authors, JIFES is temporarily also accepting submissions via email.
  2. Editorial Office Assessment Submitted papers are initially reviewed by the journal editor, who evaluates whether the paper aligns with the focus and scope of the journal. The editor checks the structure of the paper to ensure that it follows the author guidelines, with all required sections and an appropriate writing style. In addition, the editor assesses the academic quality of the paper, including the identification of any significant methodological weaknesses. The paper also undergoes Turnitin plagiarism detection before proceeding to the review stage.
  3. Editor-in-Chief Assessment The Editor-in-Chief then assesses whether the paper is suitable for the journal, ensuring its originality, significance, and relevance. If the paper does not meet these criteria, it may be rejected at this stage without further review.
  4. Invitation to Reviewers The handling editor invites suitable experts to review the paper. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, relevance to the topic, and absence of conflicts of interest. The peer review process maintains impartiality through a double-blind method, where the identities of authors and reviewers remain anonymous.
  5. Response to Invitation Potential reviewers assess whether they are available, appropriate to the topic, and free from conflicts of interest. If they decline the invitation, they can suggest alternative reviewers. The editor values the availability and expertise of reviewers before proceeding with the review process.
  6. Review Conducted Reviewers read and assess the paper thoroughly. After the initial reading, they make an evaluation, and if no significant issues are found, they proceed with a detailed point-by-point review. Based on their assessment, the reviewers provide their recommendation: accept, reject, or request major or minor revisions.
  7. Journal Evaluates Reviews The editor-in-chief and the handling editor carefully consider all submitted reviews. If reviews conflict or differ significantly, the editor may invite additional reviewers to ensure a balanced evaluation before making a final decision.
  8. Decision Communicated The editor emails the decision to the author with the reviewer comments. Reviewer feedback is shared anonymously to ensure transparency and provide constructive guidance. The corresponding author is expected to respond to the feedback and make any necessary revisions.
  9. Final Steps If the paper is accepted, it will move to the manuscript editing stage. If revisions are needed, the handling editor will incorporate the reviewers’ comments and suggestions for improvement. The author revises the paper and resubmits it for further review. Once the revisions are satisfactory, the paper will be accepted and scheduled for publication. Accepted articles will be published online and freely available as downloadable PDF files.

The entire peer review process is designed to maintain the integrity and quality of the research published in the Social Sciences and Humanities Reviews.