The following policies apply to Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Communication (JHSSC). Authors are encouraged to read these policies carefully prior to submission to ensure full compliance with editorial and ethical requirements.
Peer Review Policy
Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Communication (JHSSC) employs a double-blind peer review system for all submitted manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers remain concealed throughout the review process.
Initial Editorial Screening
Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial review to assess:
Alignment with the journal’s aims and scope
Compliance with submission guidelines (formatting, clarity, word length)
Quality, originality, and relevance of the research
Contribution to existing literature and interest to journal readership
Manuscripts that do not meet basic criteria may be returned for revision or rejected at this stage. Early rejection expedites author decision-making and allows prompt resubmission to a more suitable outlet.
Peer Review Stage
Manuscripts that pass initial screening are sent to two expert reviewers. Reviewers receive the abstract initially and the full manuscript upon acceptance of review duties. Reviewers normally have 2–3 weeks to submit their reports.
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise impartiality.
Each reviewer completes an evaluation addressing:
Novelty and originality
Contribution to the field
Ethical considerations and research integrity
Relevance to author guidelines
Quality of literature review, methodology, analysis, and interpretation
Clarity of results and discussion
Quality of documentation and referencing
Reviewers provide constructive, anonymous comments for authors. If reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the Editor-in-Chief may initiate a second review process or engage an additional reviewer.
Possible editorial decisions include:
a) Accept without revision
b) Accept with minor revisions
c) Accept with major revisions
d) Reject
Revision Stage
If revisions are requested, authors receive the reviewers’ reports and an evaluation form:
Minor revisions: 1 week
Major revisions: 2 weeks
Final Decision
The Editor-in-Chief reviews resubmitted manuscripts to determine whether reviewer concerns have been satisfactorily addressed. Further revisions may be requested, or the manuscript may be rejected if revisions are insufficient.
Copyediting, Layout, and Proofreading
Once accepted, manuscripts undergo professional copyediting, typesetting, and proofreading prior to publication. Authors must review final proofs carefully before online publication.
Complaints and Appeals
Studies in Language, Literature and Translation (SLLT) aims to resolve complaints promptly and fairly. Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the Editor-in-Chief. Appeals will be acknowledged within two working days and may involve reassessment or external review. Decisions reached following the appeal are final.
Plagiarism Policy
Studies in Language, Literature and Translation (SLLT) is committed to maintaining academic integrity. All submissions are checked for plagiarism using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin) at two stages:
Upon initial submission
After revisions are submitted
Manuscripts containing plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, may be rejected immediately.
Handling Plagiarism Complaints
If plagiarism is suspected in a published article:
The complainant contacts the editorial office citing the original and suspected sources.
The editorial office investigates and contacts the corresponding author.
Authors are given an opportunity to respond.
If plagiarism is confirmed, an erratum, correction, or retraction will be issued.
Lack of response or inadequate explanation may result in permanent retraction.
Retraction Policy
Studies in Language, Literature and Translation (SLLT) seeks to preserve the academic record. Published articles constitute the version of record.
Corrections
Authors and readers may report significant errors. Corrections are issued at the Editor-in-Chief’s discretion and published in a subsequent journal issue.
Retractions
Articles may be retracted for:
Multiple submissions
Fraudulent data
Plagiarism
Fake authorship claims
A signed statement from authors is usually required. Retraction notices link to the original article record and reason for retraction.
Removal (Extreme Cases)
Articles may be removed if they infringe legal rights or contain defamatory content. A notice of removal will replace the article.
Replacement
If inaccurate data could pose a harm or risk, authors may request article replacement with a corrected version. A retraction notice will include a link to the revised record.
Withdrawal
Before publication, manuscripts may be withdrawn by authors or by the publisher if ethical standards are violated. A note indicating formal withdrawal will replace the manuscript file.
Informed Consent Policy
Research involving human subjects requires written informed consent, except in rare circumstances where:
The work presents significant public interest,
Consent is impractical to obtain, and
Publication would not reasonably be expected to harm participants.
Authors must protect confidentiality, particularly in case studies, identifiable data, and images.
Conflict of Interest Policy
A conflict of interest exists when personal, financial, or professional affiliations could influence scholarly judgment.
Editorial Responsibilities
Editors and editorial board members:
Must not use unpublished data for personal benefit
Must recuse themselves when conflicts exist
Must maintain confidentiality in handling manuscripts
Author Responsibilities
Authors must disclose:
Financial relationships (consulting, funding, stock ownership, grants)
Non-financial relationships (professional affiliations, personal connections, beliefs impacting objectivity)
All sources of funding must be identified.
Confidentiality
Personal data and confidential information must be handled sensitively. Identifiable case materials require written consent unless the criteria under the Informed Consent Policy are met.
Appeals, Complaints, and Misconduct
Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Communication (JHSSC) follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines for managing editorial complaints, appeals, and allegations of misconduct.
All complaints are handled impartially and in confidence
Allegations may concern pre- or post-publication materials
Abusive behavior toward staff, editors, authors, or reviewers will not be tolerated
Concerns should be directed to:
Open Access Policy
Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Communication (JHSSC) practices full Open Access, ensuring free and immediate access to published research. Users may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to article content without restriction, consistent with the BOAI definition of open access.
No permission is required from the publisher or authors to use published content for lawful academic purposes.