Insights: International Journal of Humanities, Management, and Social Sciences (IIJHMSS) is a double-blind, peer-reviewed, open-access academic journal published under the Global Heritage Research Center for Languages and Literature. The journal adheres to a rigorous review process that fosters academic excellence, transparency, and constructive feedback to enhance the quality of submitted manuscripts.
The peer-review system is a cornerstone of the journal’s credibility and integrity. It relies on the ethical commitment of reviewers to evaluate manuscripts with fairness, professionalism, and confidentiality. Reviewers are expected to follow the highest standards of academic responsibility throughout the evaluation process. Their reviews contribute directly to the scholarly value and global impact of the journal.
Reviewers Should:
- Accept only if qualified: Agree to review a manuscript only if they have the appropriate subject expertise.
- Inform promptly if unable to review: Notify the editor immediately if they cannot undertake the review due to time constraints or lack of expertise.
- Respect deadlines: Complete the review within the given timeframe or inform the editor in case of any expected delay.
- Maintain confidentiality: Treat all manuscript content as confidential and avoid disclosing or discussing it with unauthorized individuals.
- Avoid using manuscript content: Do not use any part of the manuscript for personal or academic benefit before publication.
- Declare conflicts of interest: Disclose any real or potential conflicts of interest that could influence their review.
- Provide objective evaluations: Assess the manuscript impartially, based on its academic merit, originality, methodology, and contribution to the field.
- Offer constructive feedback: Suggest improvements clearly and respectfully, avoiding vague comments or harsh language.
- Report ethical concerns: Alert the editor if there is evidence of plagiarism, data fabrication, or other unethical practices.
- Refrain from personal bias: Avoid letting personal, institutional, or ideological views influence the review.
- Respect authorship confidentiality: Do not attempt to identify the author(s) or disclose assumptions about authorship.
- Use journal’s review format: Submit feedback using the journal’s prescribed review form or structure.
- Avoid personal criticism: Focus feedback on the content and quality of the work, not the presumed identity or intentions of the author(s).
- Check for proper citation: Evaluate whether the manuscript sufficiently cites relevant and up-to-date literature.
- Evaluate methodology: Comment on the appropriateness and clarity of the research design, data collection, and analysis.
- Comment on relevance: Assess whether the manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope and offers a meaningful contribution to the field.
- Be open to dialogue: Respond to any follow-up questions or clarifications from the editor if needed.
- Avoid delegation: Do not assign the review to a third party without prior approval from the editor.
- Provide clear recommendations: Indicate whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected, supported by reasoned arguments.
- Respect editorial decisions: Understand that the final decision rests with the editor, who may consider multiple reviewer perspectives.