Double-Blind Peer-Review Process

DOUBLE-BLIND PEER-REVIEW PROCESS

The International Jordanian Journal Aryam for Humanities and Social Sciences (IJJA) follows a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure the highest academic standards and the integrity of published research. Both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the entire review procedure.

  1. Submission of Manuscript: The corresponding author submits the manuscript through the IJJA online submission system. All listed co-authors must meet authorship criteria and approve the submission.
  2. Initial Editorial Assessment: The Editorial Office conducts a preliminary check to verify:
    • Compliance with Author Guidelines
    • Completeness of submission files
    • Formatting and referencing consistency
    • Scientific contribution is not evaluated at this stage.
  3. Evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief: The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Editorial Board Member evaluates the manuscript to determine:
    • Originality
    • Relevance to the journal’s scope
    • Academic contribution
    • If unsuitable, the manuscript is desk-rejected. If suitable, reviewers are nominated.
  4. Selection and Invitation of Reviewers: The Editor-in-Chief invites competent reviewers based on expertise, prior publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest. Invitations continue until two reviewers accept.
  5. Reviewer Response: Invited reviewers may accept or decline based on availability and expertise. When declining, reviewers are encouraged to recommend suitable alternatives.
  6. Review Process: Reviewers conduct a thorough and objective evaluation within approximately 4 weeks, assessing:
    • Scientific validity and methodological rigor
    • Originality and contribution to the field
    • Quality of analysis and presentation
    • Accuracy of citations and referencing
    • Ethical compliance
    • Each reviewer provides a detailed report and recommends one of the standard editorial decisions.
  7. Editorial Assessment of Reviews: The Editor-in-Chief considers the reviewers’ comments. If the reviews conflict, a third reviewer may be consulted.
  8. Revision and Resubmission: If revisions are requested, authors must:
    • Address each reviewer comment in a point-by-point response
    • Submit a revised manuscript within the given timeframe
    • Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review.
  9. Final Editorial Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision based on reviewers’ recommendations and the quality of revisions. Authors are notified of the outcome.
  10. Production Process: Accepted manuscripts undergo:
    • Technical editing
    • Language polishing
    • Layout and formatting
    • DOI assignment
  11. Online Publication: Once finalized, articles are published online with an assigned DOI and become freely accessible.
  • Possible Editorial Decisions: Reviewers may recommend one of the following:
    • Accept
    • Accept with minor revisions
    • Accept with major revisions
    • Reject
    • Accept with reservations

Important Not : IJJA employs a double-blind peer review process. All manuscripts are evaluated by at least two independent experts in the field. The review process typically takes 2–3 months, after which the corresponding author is notified of the decision.