JHSS · Peer Review
Reviewers
How manuscripts for the Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences are evaluated — and what reviewers commit to.
Double-blind review
JHSS employs a double-blind peer review model: the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed to ensure impartial evaluation. Manuscripts are reviewed anonymously by qualified experts. Reviewer assignments are confidential — reviewer names are not published on this page.
Stages
- Initial editorial screening for scope, quality and submission requirements.
- Plagiarism and ethical compliance check.
- Assignment to suitable subject-expert reviewers.
- Anonymous peer evaluation of originality, rigour, method, clarity and contribution.
- Editorial decision: accept, revise, or reject — with possible re-evaluation after revision.
Review criteria
- Originality and contribution to knowledge
- Relevance to the journal's scope
- Clarity of objectives and argument
- Appropriateness of methodology or conceptual framework
- Quality of analysis and use of current literature
- Language clarity and academic presentation
Responsibilities of reviewers
- Maintain strict confidentiality of manuscripts.
- Review objectively, without personal bias, in respectful language.
- Declare conflicts of interest and decline where impartiality is at risk.
- Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
- Alert the editor to suspected plagiarism or ethical concerns.
Full guidance: Reviewer Guidelines · Publication Ethics
Interested in becoming a reviewer?
Share your academic profile and areas of expertise with NADT.
Join NADT as a Reviewer
Opens the NADT contributor form in a new tab. Submitting an expression of interest does not constitute appointment.
Contact the editorial office: neveradullteacher@gmail.com