Review Process

The Journal of Socioeconomics and Development (JSeD) conducts peer review standards to improve the quality of publications and the effectiveness of the review process. Peer review standards are evaluated at all times to find the best results for the publication of articles, and editorial processes with integrity and responsibility.

The JSeD places great importance on the peer review process, which

• Peer review serves as a valuable tool for enhancing the quality of articles. It provides valuable insights, advice, and guidance to the Editor, assisting in making decisions regarding article publication.
• In this process, peer reviewers contribute their expertise to critically evaluate a manuscript's novelty, key references, and research roadmap.
• Peer review is an essential aspect of academic communication, promoting mutual understanding and support among editors, reviewers, and authors. It aims to advance scientific development, shape policy concepts, and uphold human dignity and civilization.

All manuscripts submitted to JSeD undergo a thorough peer review process, which includes the following stages:

• The editor evaluates all submitted manuscripts to ensure they comply with the author guidelines and are suitable for the scope and substance of the journal. Each manuscript is carefully reviewed to determine if it is appropriate for the journal and has a high likelihood of receiving favorable reviews. The Editor-in-Chief receives input and guidance from the editorial board members to select and assign qualified reviewers.
• All submitted manuscripts will undergo a thorough peer review process by at least two qualified experts. Depending on the nature and content of the manuscript, editors may also seek additional reviews. Reviewers will evaluate the manuscript based on scientific criteria including its content, writing quality, originality, methodology, research findings, and implications.
• The review process is conducted using a double-blind peer review system and is overseen by the editor via OJS. The peer review procedures are managed through OJS, and the review results are then sent back to the editor.
• Within a period of one month after the submission, the Editor in Chief or the appointed editorial board will review the manuscript and decide whether to accept, reject, or ask for revisions based on the feedback from the reviewer. The editor's decision may also include considerations related to the novelty of the work, relevance to existing literature, clarity of the research problem, depth of discussion, implication of the research, and achievement of research objectives. Upon receiving the decision, the author has one month to make any necessary corrections or revisions to the manuscript.

The revised manuscript will be re-evaluated to see if it addresses the comments from the reviewers and editors. If deemed feasible, it will undergo a copyediting process by the editor-in-chief and editorial board to ensure format consistency without altering the substance of the manuscript. The results of the copyediting process will be shared with the author for final feedback. Following this, the technical editor will handle the layout and proofreading work. Upon approval by the editor-in-chief, the technical editor will prepare the article for publication. All editing processes are carried out on OJS and can be monitored by the author.

In certain cases, the editor may review the manuscript or published article to ensure that it meets ethical standards. The editor may also contact the author to clarify any issues and ensure that the research has been conducted properly and publication decisions are free from bias. Additionally, the editor has the authority to withdraw a published manuscript if it is determined that it does not meet publication standards. This decision may involve article withdrawal, retraction, removal, or replacement, depending on the specific case and evidence of standards and ethics violations.  See also publication ethics