Peer Review Process

Peer review process

The peer review process  is a core mechanism in scientific publications in the Journal of Social Knowledge and History. The main objective is to guarantee the quality, validity, and originality of scientific works before they are published in the Journal of Social and Historical Knowledge. The following is a complete explanation of the peer review mechanism of the Journal of Social Knowledge and History:

1. Manuscript Submission

The author submits articles to the Journal of Social and Historical Knowledge through an online submission system. At this stage:

  • The manuscript must meet the journal writing style (style guide).
  • It is usually sent along with a  cover letter and a list of conflicts of interest if any.

2. Initial Examination by the Editor (Desk Review)

The main editor (chief editor or managing editor) performs the initial screening:

  • Check the completeness and suitability of the topic  with the scope of the journal.
  • Assess whether the manuscript is suitable to be forwarded to the reviewer or rejected directly (desk rejection).

3. Appointment of Reviewer

If you pass the desk review, the editor of the Journal of Social Knowledge and History appoints 2 expert reviewers according to the field of study:

  • A reviewer is an academic or researcher who has expertise in the topic of the manuscript.
  • The process can be double-blind, or open review (see below).

4. Review Process

Reviewers of the Journal of Social Knowledge and History read and evaluate the manuscript based on criteria such as:

  • Originality: Does research offer new ideas?
  • Methodology: Is the approach appropriate and clearly explained?
  • Scientific contributions: Are they important and relevant to the social sciences/history?
  • Structure and quality of writing.

The reviewer of the Journal of Social Knowledge and History then gave recommendations:

  • Accept without revision.
  • Accept with minor revisions.
  • Major overhaul.
  • Reject.

It is usually accompanied by detailed comments and notes for the author.

5. Revision by the Author

If requested for revision, the author should:

  • Improve the manuscript according to the reviewer's comments.
  • Include a list of responses to comments that show changes and explanations.

This process can happen several times until the reviewers and editors of the Journal of Social Knowledge and History are satisfied.

6. Final Editor's Decision

The editor of the Journal of Social and Historical Knowledge makes a decision based on the reviewer's input:

  • Publish.
  • Advanced revisions, or
  • Reject.

If accepted, the manuscript goes to the final editing stage and layout for publication.

7. Publications

The Journal of Social and Historical Knowledge publishes the manuscript online and open access so that it can be widely accessed.

 

The Journal of Social Knowledge and History uses double-blind to maintain objectivity, especially since many articles contain interpretive views or criticism of certain historical figures/sources.

 

Special to History:

  • Reviews often check the accuracy of primary sources, historical context, and validity of interpretations.
  • Editors may request clarification on archives, quotations, or translations of historical texts.