Peer Review Process

Social Science and Governance Review (SSGR) applies a double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, objectivity, and academic integrity of every published article.

Review Model

SSGR uses a double-blind review model, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review. This minimizes bias and ensures that evaluation is based solely on scholarly merit.

Review Stages

  1. Submission and Editorial Screening. Each submitted manuscript is first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or a Section Editor for scope, academic quality, formatting, and compliance with the journal's basic requirements (desk review, typically 1–2 weeks).
  2. Reviewer Assignment. Manuscripts that pass screening are assigned to at least two qualified reviewers selected based on their expertise in the relevant field.
  3. Peer Review. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript on originality, methodology, theoretical grounding, academic rigor, relevance, and clarity, then provide a recommendation: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
  4. Editorial Decision. Based on the reviewers' recommendations and editorial assessment, the editor communicates the decision to the author along with reviewer feedback (anonymized in double-blind review).
  5. Revision and Re-review. If revision is requested, authors must resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified timeframe. Major revisions may undergo a second round of review.
  6. Copyediting, Production, Publication. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, DOI assignment, and publication in the next issue.

Review Duration

The typical review cycle takes 4–8 weeks from submission to first decision. Complex or heavily revised manuscripts may require additional time.

Number of Reviewers

A minimum of two reviewers is assigned per manuscript. The editor may assign a third reviewer in case of conflicting recommendations or specialized content.

Evaluation Criteria

  • Originality and contribution to the field
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the methodology
  • Soundness of the theoretical or conceptual framework
  • Clarity, structure, and academic writing quality
  • Relevance to the journal's scope (social sciences, governance, public policy, public administration, community development)
  • Proper citation and adherence to ethical standards

Notification

Authors are notified at each stage of the process via email. Decisions and reviewer comments are accessible through the journal system after login.