Peer Review Process/ Policy

JRSS has a strict double blind peer review policy. We take advice on individual manuscripts from expert reviewers who are not part of the journal’s editorial staff/committee. After the initial Desk Review by the editorial staff/committee, the individual manuscripts are sent for local and foreign reviews. The reviewers' suggestions, observations, and recommendations are accordingly conveyed to the author(s). For the sake of transparency, if the reviewers demand to read the revised manuscript, we resend the articles in the second round of reviews. If they recommend the article for publication with minor changes, our editorial staff ensures that all the changes are incorporated (along with any editorial suggestions) before the publication of an article. In order to ensure a smooth and transparent peer review process, the authors are required to closely follow the article submission process at

Contribution to Editorial Decisions


Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.




Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Standards of Objectivity


Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Acknowledgement of Sources


Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.