For Reviewers

Journal Information

Contents

1. Role of Reviewers

Reviewers play a vital role in supporting the journal’s mission to advance global understanding of human society, behavior, and culture. Their primary responsibilities include:

  1. Providing timely, objective, and constructive feedback on assigned manuscripts.
  2. Assessing the originality, relevance, and scholarly contribution of the research.
  3. Identifying theoretical, methodological, or interpretive strengths and weaknesses.
  4. Detecting potential ethical issues such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, or data fabrication.
  5. Recommending whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected.

2. Peer Review Model

The journal employs a double-blind peer review process to ensure fairness, confidentiality, and impartiality:

  • The authors’ identities are not disclosed to reviewers.
  • The reviewers’ identities remain anonymous to authors.
  • This model guarantees that evaluation is based solely on academic merit and scholarly quality, free from personal or institutional bias.

3. Reviewer Guidelines

A. Scholarly Quality and Contribution

Is the research question clearly defined and relevant to the social sciences or humanities?

Does the paper contribute new insights, theories, or interpretations to its discipline?

Are the methodologies or analytical frameworks appropriate and well-applied?

Does the work demonstrate depth of research and critical engagement with existing literature?

B. Presentation and Organization

Is the manuscript logically structured and clearly written?

Are arguments coherent and supported by appropriate evidence or citations?

Are tables, figures, or qualitative data (if included) clear and well-integrated?

Are references accurate, current, and formatted according to the journal’s style (APA 7th edition)?

C. Ethical and Professional Standards

Has the author properly acknowledged funding, permissions, or conflicts of interest?

Are there any concerns regarding plagiarism or redundant publication?

If applicable, does the research comply with ethical standards for human subjects, cultural sensitivity, or data handling?

4. Review Report Structure

Reviewers are requested to submit their evaluations through the journal’s online system or via official email. A thorough review should include the following components:

  • Summary: A brief overview of the manuscript’s focus, objectives, and major findings.
  • Strengths: Notable contributions, originality, or well-developed arguments.
  • Weaknesses/Concerns: Areas that need clarification, improvement, or additional support.
  • Suggestions: Constructive recommendations for enhancing clarity, depth, or presentation.

Final Recommendation:

Accept as is

Minor revision

Major revision

Reject

5. Recognition of Reviewers

The journal acknowledges and appreciates the valuable service provided by its reviewers through the following:

  • Certificate of Reviewing: Issued upon request after each completed review.
  • Annual Acknowledgement: Recognition of active reviewers on the journal’s website.
  • Editorial Opportunities: Reviewers demonstrating consistent excellence may be invited to join the Editorial Board.

6. How to Become a Reviewer

We welcome applications from qualified academicians, researchers, and professionals specializing in social sciences, humanities, or interdisciplinary cultural studies.

Interested candidates are invited to submit the following details to the Editorial Office:

  • Full Name and Institutional Affiliation
  • Academic Position and Qualifications
  • ORCID iD / Scopus Author ID / ResearcherID (if available)
  • Areas of Expertise
  • Selected List of Publications

📧 Applications can be emailed to: [editorial email ID]

7. Reviewer Ethics

Reviews must be objective, evidence-based, and respectful.

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality and must not share or discuss the manuscript with others.

Any suspicion of ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, authorship disputes, data falsification) must be reported to the Editorial Office immediately.

Reviewers should decline an assignment if a potential conflict of interest exists.

8. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviews must be objective, evidence-based, and respectful.

Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality and must not share or discuss the manuscript with others.

Any suspicion of ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, authorship disputes, data falsification) must be reported to the Editorial Office immediately.

Reviewers should decline an assignment if a potential conflict of interest exists.