Peer Review Process

Overview

Pakistan Social Sciences Review (PSSR) follows a rigorous, transparent, and ethical double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all submitted manuscripts. In a double-blind system, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

The peer review policy of PSSR is aligned with internationally recognized best practices in scholarly publishing and the ethical principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

  1. Submission and Acknowledgement

Manuscripts are submitted electronically through the journal’s online submission system. Upon successful submission, the corresponding author receives an acknowledgement email confirming receipt of the manuscript.

  1. Initial Editorial Screening (Pre-Review)

Each submission undergoes an initial assessment by the editorial office to determine:

  • Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal
  • Compliance with author guidelines
  • Adherence to ethical standards
  • Plagiarism screening using appropriate detection tools
  • Accuracy and relevance of citations

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

  1. Editorial Assessment

Submissions that pass the initial screening are evaluated by a member of the editorial team to assess:

  • Academic merit and originality
  • Methodological soundness
  • Theoretical and/or empirical contribution
  • Clarity of presentation and structure

Based on this assessment, the manuscript may be:

  • Sent for external peer review
  • Returned to authors for preliminary revision
  • Rejected with a reasoned editorial decision

  1. External Peer Review

Manuscripts approved for peer review are evaluated by independent external experts in the relevant field.

Review Model

  • Double-blind peer review
  • A minimum of two independent reviewers
  • Reviewers selected based on subject expertise and research experience
  • Reviewers may be affiliated with national or international institutions

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and significance
  • Appropriateness of methodology
  • Validity and reliability of findings
  • Quality of analysis and discussion
  • Ethical compliance and referencing

  1. Reviewer Recommendations and Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ reports, the editor may reach one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Invite major revisions
  • Reject

Anonymous reviewer comments are shared with authors to support transparency and scholarly improvement.

  1. Revision Process

Authors invited to revise their manuscripts must submit:

  • A revised version of the manuscript
  • A point-by-point response to reviewer comments

Revised manuscripts may be reassessed by the original reviewers or evaluated by the editorial team. Multiple rounds of revision may be required.

  1. Final Decision and Acceptance

Once the manuscript meets all scholarly, ethical, and editorial requirements, it is formally accepted for publication. An official acceptance notification is issued to the corresponding author.

  1. Post-Acceptance Processing

Accepted manuscripts undergo production processes including:

  • Copyediting and language refinement
  • Layout and formatting
  • Assignment of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
  • Preparation of proofs for author approval

  1. Publication

The final approved version of the article is published online as part of the scheduled issue and is made immediately available under the journal’s open-access policy.

  1. Peer Review Workflow

(A visual flowchart illustrating the submission, review, revision, acceptance, and publication process may be displayed here.)

  1. Ethical Oversight and Confidentiality

  • Editors and reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest
  • Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents
  • Editorial decisions are based solely on academic merit and reviewer recommendations
  • Appeals, complaints, and ethical concerns are handled in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Best-Practice Alignment

PSSR’s peer review process is designed in line with internationally recognized scholarly publishing standards and ethical best practices, including those recommended by:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)