Peer Review Policy

Double-Blind Peer Review Policy
Introduction:

Wah Academia Journal of Social Sciences is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and quality in the publication of scholarly articles. Peer review is a critical component of the publication process, ensuring the validity and significance of the research presented. To uphold the integrity of the review process, the journal adheres to a double-blind
peer review policy.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process:

  1. Submission and Initial Assessment:

◉ Authors submit their manuscripts to the journal's editorial office.
◉ The editorial team conducts an initial assessment to ensure submissions meet the journal's guidelines and basic standards.
◉ Manuscripts that meet the initial requirements are sent out for double-blind peer review.

  1. Selection of Reviewers:

◉ Editors select expert reviewers based on their expertise in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript.
◉ Reviewers are chosen from a diverse range of institutions and geographical locations to avoid any potential conflicts of interest.

  1. Double-Blind Review:

◉ Reviewers receive manuscripts without any information about the authors' identities.
◉ Authors are also blinded to the identities of the reviewers.
◉ This double-blind process ensures unbiased evaluation and maintains the anonymity of both authors and reviewers.

  1. Peer Review Evaluation:

◉ Reviewers assess the manuscript's originality, methodology, clarity, significance, and adherence to ethical guidelines.
◉ Reviewers provide constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.
◉ Reviewers make recommendations regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript.

  1. Editorial Decision:

◉ Based on the reviewers' comments and recommendations, the editor-in-chief makes a decision on the manuscript.
◉ Authors receive anonymous feedback, ensuring that all comments and suggestions are objective and unbiased.

  1. Confidentiality:

◉ Reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the review process.
◉ Reviewer identities are also kept confidential unless reviewers choose to disclose their identities.

  1. Handling Conflicts of Interest:

◉ Reviewers are asked to declare any potential conflicts of interest that might affect the impartiality of their review.
◉ If a conflict of interest is identified, the manuscript is reassigned to another reviewer.

  1. Appeals Process:

◉ Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions.
◉ Appeals are considered objectively and may involve consultation with additional reviewers.

Conclusion:

The double-blind peer review process at Wah Academia Journal of Social Sciences is designed to ensure the quality and integrity of the articles published. Through this rigorous and unbiased evaluation, the journal aims to contribute to the advancement of social sciences research while upholding the highest ethical standards.