Peer Review Policy

The International Jordanian Journal Aryam for Humanities and Social Sciences (IJJA) applies a double-blind peer review process in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation process.

Peer review is an essential component of the journal’s editorial workflow and ensures the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts.

Peer Review Type

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated through a double-blind peer review system without exception.

Peer Review Process

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All manuscripts are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief for relevance, originality, academic quality, and compliance with the journal’s submission guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements may be rejected at this stage.

2. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers in the relevant field. Reviewer and author identities remain strictly confidential.

3. Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers assess manuscripts based on originality, methodological rigor, clarity, academic contribution, and relevance to the field.

4. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions
  • Reject

5. Revision Stage

Authors must address all reviewer comments and submit a revised version for further evaluation when required.

6. Final Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewer reports, revised manuscripts, and overall editorial assessment.

Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations
  • Maintain confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts
  • Declare any conflicts of interest
  • Identify relevant missing references
  • Do not use unpublished materials for personal advantage

Editorial Responsibilities

  • Ensure fair and unbiased manuscript evaluation
  • Select qualified and independent reviewers
  • Maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process
  • Base publication decisions solely on academic merit
  • Follow COPE ethical guidelines in all editorial procedures

Ethical Standards

The journal adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, and all forms of unethical publishing practices are strictly prohibited and will result in rejection or retraction.

Peer Review Timeline

The typical peer review process takes approximately 2 to 8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.