Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to JCIS (Discourse: Critical Inquiry and Social Studies) undergo a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Team to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope;

  • Originality and scholarly significance;

  • Compliance with the journal’s author guidelines;

  • Ethical standards and academic integrity requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet these basic criteria may be rejected without external review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject matter. JCISS applies a double-blind review system in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Reviewers are invited to assess manuscripts based on several criteria, including:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge;

  • Relevance to contemporary scholarly debates;

  • Theoretical and conceptual clarity;

  • Methodological appropriateness and rigor;

  • Quality of analysis and interpretation;

  • Use of relevant literature and sources;

  • Organization, coherence, and academic writing quality;

  • Compliance with ethical research standards.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor may reach one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept Submission – The manuscript is accepted for publication with no or only minor editorial revisions.

  2. Minor Revisions Required – The manuscript is accepted subject to minor revisions.

  3. Major Revisions Required – Substantial revisions are required before further consideration.

  4. Resubmit for Review – The manuscript requires significant redevelopment and will undergo a new round of peer review upon resubmission.

  5. Reject Submission – The manuscript is not suitable for publication in JCISS.

The final publication decision rests with the Editor and Editorial Board.

Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests are expected to submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a response letter explaining how reviewers’ comments have been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain the confidentiality of all manuscripts and review materials;

  • Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations;

  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest;

  • Report suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, or other forms of research misconduct;

  • Complete reviews within the agreed review period.

Review Timeline

JCISS strives to provide authors with an initial editorial decision within four to eight weeks after the manuscript enters the peer-review process. However, review times may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

Publication Integrity

The peer-review process at JCISS is conducted in accordance with principles of fairness, transparency, academic integrity, and editorial independence. All editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit and the contribution of the manuscript to academic knowledge and critical inquiry.