Peer Review Policy

The International Journal of Human and Social Dynamics (IJHSD) follows a double-anonymous peer-review process for scholarly research articles.

The purpose of peer review is to ensure the academic quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance, ethical integrity, and scholarly contribution of manuscripts published in the journal.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first examined by the editorial office to determine whether they:

  • fall within the aims and scope of IJHSD;
  • meet the journal's submission and formatting requirements;
  • contain sufficient academic and scholarly content;
  • comply with research and publication ethics requirements; and
  • are suitable for external peer review.

The initial editorial screening does not constitute acceptance of the manuscript.

2. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

Manuscripts may be screened for plagiarism, inappropriate text similarity, duplicate publication, and other forms of academic misconduct before or during peer review.

Where significant concerns are identified, the manuscript may be returned to the authors, rejected, or investigated in accordance with the journal's research integrity procedures.

3. Double-Anonymous Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are normally evaluated by at least two independent external reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

Under the double-anonymous review model:

  • reviewers are not informed of the identity of the authors;
  • authors are not informed of the identity of the reviewers; and
  • manuscripts and review reports are handled confidentially.

Editorial board members may participate in the editorial process but should not review manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

4. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on:

  • subject expertise;
  • relevant academic or professional experience;
  • research expertise;
  • absence of conflicts of interest; and
  • availability to provide an objective and timely assessment.

Authors may suggest potential reviewers where permitted by the editorial office; however, the final selection of reviewers remains the responsibility of the journal.

5. Review Criteria

Reviewers are normally asked to evaluate:

  • originality and contribution;
  • relevance to the journal's scope;
  • clarity of research objectives;
  • adequacy of the literature review;
  • methodological rigor;
  • analysis and interpretation;
  • validity of conclusions;
  • presentation and organization;
  • ethical considerations; and
  • quality and appropriateness of references.

6. Editorial Decision

Following peer review, the editor may make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept;
  • Accept subject to minor revisions;
  • Revise and resubmit / major revisions; or
  • Reject.

The final editorial decision is made by the responsible editor based on the manuscript, reviewer reports, journal policies, and the overall scholarly quality of the work.

Receipt of favorable reviewer comments does not automatically guarantee acceptance.

7. Conflicting Reviewer Recommendations

If reviewers provide substantially conflicting recommendations, the editor may request an additional independent review or undertake further editorial assessment before reaching a decision.

8. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant procedural error, factual misunderstanding, or substantive issue affected the decision.

Appeals must provide a clear and evidence-based explanation. Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or an appropriate independent editor.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

9. Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and must not use unpublished information obtained during the review process for personal or professional advantage.

10. Special Issues

Special issues, if published, remain under the overall editorial responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief. Articles in special issues are subject to the journal's normal peer-review and research-integrity requirements.

Guest editors must not make editorial decisions concerning manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

11. Peer Review and Publication Fees

Editorial decisions and peer-review outcomes are independent of any publication charge, waiver, or author's ability to pay.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance based on payment of any fee.