Evaluation policy

JSSE adopts the single-blind peer review process, which consists of one or more external reviewers who are assigned to review the submitted manuscript, and the identity of peer-reviewer is hidden from the authors during evaluation process.

The reviewer(s) is(are) selected under the following criteria: Reviewers do not have any relation with the authors (e.g. close collaborator in research, co-authors in past papers, colleagues of job/university, etc.). Reviewers do not have any conflict of interest with the authors of the paper that are under evaluation.

During the manuscript submission, the authors are requested to suggest reviewers taking into account all the considerations explained above.

The Editors will decide whether these suggested reviewers be contacted or not to review the submitted manuscript.

In all cases, the names/contacts of these suggested reviewers will be added to our database.   

All scientific contributions are reviewed by the Chief Editor, the Associate Editors, and/or Guest Peer-reviewers, by the following processes:

  • Initial review: in this stage, the editorial assistant evaluates each manuscript regarding compliance with the norms established in the Submissions Preparation Checklist, the plagiarism criteria, and good editorial practices. If the manuscript does not meet the established standards, it will be returned to the author for correction. Manuscripts that do not pass the initial review after the second evaluation will be refused and returned to the authors.
  • Evaluation Process: after the initial review, the manuscripts are assigned to one or two independent peer-reviewers, according to their specialization in the specific field of knowledge.
  • Reviews: the peer-reviewers send their reviews directly through the OJS system. The decision may be "Accept Submission;" "Major Revision Required"; “Minor Revision Required”;  or "Rejection". If the decision is "Major Revision Required" or “Minor Revision Required” the manuscript is sent to the authors for corrections, and the manuscript should be submitted for the second round of peer-reviews.
  • Final decision: Approval or Rejection; based on the reviewer's suggestions, the Editor-in-Chief takes a final decision: approval or rejection of the manuscript. If accepted, the manuscript enters the editing/publishing process for publication.


Reasons for Acceptance

High quality of results description

High methodological quality

High contribution to knowledge

Originality of the study.


Reasons for Rejection:

Outside the general scope of the journal

Lack of originality

Unjustified conclusions

Inappropriate, incomprehensible language

Methodological errors

Not obey the Submission Preparation Checklist