Upholding Quality Through Transparent & Ethical Evaluation

At the Journal of Interdisciplinary Social, Digital, Creative & Engineering Studies (JISDCES), we uphold a rigorous double-blind peer review policy that ensures impartial, ethical, and high-quality evaluation of all submitted manuscripts. Our commitment to scholarly excellence is guided by internationally recognized standards of academic publishing integrity.

1. Type of Peer Review

All manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review, meaning:

• Reviewers are unaware of the authors' identities.
• Authors are unaware of who reviewed their manuscript.
• This eliminates potential bias and ensures a fair, transparent, and objective review process.

2. Editorial Oversight

• Upon submission, manuscripts are first screened by the Editor-in-Chief or Section Editors for relevance, originality, formatting, and alignment with the journal’s scope.
• Suitable submissions are assigned to at least two expert reviewers from the field for thorough evaluation.
• Final decisions (accept, revise, reject) are made based on reviewer feedback and editorial judgment.

3. Reviewer Selection & Responsibilities

• Reviewers are chosen for their subject expertise and academic reputation.
• They are expected to provide constructive, respectful, and unbiased evaluations.
• Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest and may decline assignments if such conflicts exist.
• Confidentiality is strictly enforced—manuscripts must not be shared or discussed outside the review process.

4. Criteria for Evaluation

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts based on:

• Originality and significance of the research
• Methodological soundness and academic rigor
• Clarity, coherence, and structure
• Relevance to the interdisciplinary scope of the journal
• Compliance with ethical standards

5. Confidentiality and Data Ethics

All information in submitted manuscripts is considered confidential. Editors and reviewers are prohibited from using or disclosing any part of a manuscript prior to publication.

JISDCES follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines to ensure the highest ethical standards in the peer review and editorial decision-making process.

6. Plagiarism and Ethical Compliance

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software (such as iThenticate). Manuscripts found to have ethical violations (including data fabrication, duplicate submissions, or unauthorized use of content) will be rejected, and appropriate actions will be taken.

7. Decision & Revisions

Following the review:

• Accepted manuscripts proceed to final formatting and publication.
• Revisions (minor or major) are requested with detailed reviewer feedback.
• Rejected manuscripts are provided with transparent reasoning.

Authors are given a clear timeline to submit revisions. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review if needed.

8. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned justification. All appeals are evaluated fairly by the editorial board. Complaints about the review process are addressed in accordance with our ethics and transparency policy.

📧 Contact