Peer-Review Process

The Journal of Contemporary and Applied Social Sciences (JCAS) employs a rigorous double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality, relevance, originality, and academic integrity of all published research. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential to minimize bias and support objective evaluation.

Upon submission, each manuscript is initially screened by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to assess its fit with the journal’s aims and scope and to ensure compliance with submission guidelines. Manuscripts that pass this initial editorial screening are then assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise.

Reviewers evaluate submissions based on criteria such as originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, contribution to the discipline, and alignment with ethical research standards. They provide detailed, constructive comments and recommendations, which may include requests for revisions, clarifications, or additional analysis. Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.

Typical reviewer recommendations include:

• Accept as submitted

• Accept with minor revisions

• Accept with major revisions

• Reject

Based on these reviews and the editorial assessment, a final publication decision is made by the editorial board. Authors are notified of review outcomes and are invited to revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewer and editor feedback as needed.

The double-blind system ensures that no reviewer has prior knowledge of the authors’ identities and vice versa, promoting impartial and fair evaluation of scientific work.