| ADDITIONAL MENU |
| Editorial Team |
| Reviewers |
| Contact |
| Author Fees |
| TOOLS |
![]() |
| INDEXED BY: |
![]() |
1. Initial Screening:
- Each submitted manuscript undergoes an initial review by the editorial team.
- The aim is to assess the manuscript's suitability with the journal's scope and standards.
2. Expert Reviewers:
- Manuscripts meeting basic criteria are assigned to reviewers with relevant expertise in the field.
- Reviewers are experts in the scientific field related to the manuscript's topic.
3. Double-blind Process:
- The review process is conducted in a double-blind manner, meaning the identities of both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other.
- This ensures objective and unbiased evaluations.
4. Criteria for Evaluation:
- Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on academic merit, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field.
- They provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement.
5. Decision Making:
- After receiving comments from reviewers, the editorial team makes a decision regarding the manuscript's fate.
- Decisions may include acceptance, revision, or rejection of the manuscript.
6. Author Notification:
- Authors are notified of the decision along with reviewers' comments.
- They are given the opportunity to revise their manuscript based on received feedback.
7. Revision and Final Decision:
- Revised manuscripts may undergo further review before a final decision is made.
- Once revisions are completed, the final decision is made by the editorial team.
8. Integrity and Ethics:
- The peer review process aims to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity and publication ethics.
- This involves transparency, honesty, and thoroughness in assessing the quality and originality of manuscripts.
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
JHESS: Journal Hub for Humanities and Social Science
Published by Yayasan Masjid Al-Muhajirin
Jl. Suka Jadi Desa Tarai Bangun Kecamatan Tambang
Kabupaten Kampar, Provinsi Riau, Indonesia