Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process
The FULafia Journal of Sociological Studies (FJSS) adopts a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed to ensure impartiality, objectivity, and academic fairness. This process is central to maintaining the integrity and scholarly quality of the journal.
Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo a preliminary screening by the editorial team to confirm relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, as well as compliance with formatting and submission guidelines. Manuscripts that meet these initial criteria are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with subject-matter expertise in the relevant area of study.
Reviewers evaluate submissions based on criteria such as:
-
Originality and significance of the research
-
Methodological rigor and theoretical grounding
-
Clarity and coherence of presentation
-
Relevance to the field of sociology and related disciplines
-
Contribution to knowledge and potential societal impact
Reviewers provide constructive, detailed feedback intended to help authors improve the quality of their work. Based on these reviews, the editorial board may recommend one of the following decisions:
-
Acceptance (with or without minor revisions)
-
Request for major revisions and resubmission
-
Rejection, if the manuscript does not meet the required scholarly standards
Authors are expected to respond to reviewer comments thoroughly and revise their manuscripts accordingly. The revised submission will be re-evaluated before a final decision is made.
The average timeframe for the peer review process is two to four weeks, subject to the complexity of the manuscript and timely responses from reviewers and authors. FJSS remains committed to a fair, timely, and academically rigorous review process that supports scholarly development and excellence.
