Peer Review Process

The Journal of Islamic Humanities and Social Inquiry (JIHSI) employs a rigorous Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the highest standards of academic integrity and the quality of published research. This means that the identity of the authors is concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the entire evaluation process.
The following steps outline our editorial workflow from submission to final decision:

1. Initial Screening and Technical Check
Upon submission, every manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the Editorial Office. This stage ensures:
•    Alignment with Scope: The manuscript fits within the interdisciplinary focus of Islamic humanities and social inquiry.
•    Technical Compliance: The submission adheres to the Author Guidelines and the APA 7th Edition formatting.
•    Anonymization: The manuscript has been properly blinded for review (no author names or affiliations in the file).

2. Screening for Plagiarism
JIHSI maintains a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism. Before being assigned to reviewers, all manuscripts are screened using professional detection software (e.g., Turnitin or iThenticate). Manuscripts with a high similarity index or evidence of unoriginal content will be rejected immediately.

3. Editorial Assessment (Pre-Review)
The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Associate Editor evaluates the manuscript's intellectual merit and potential contribution to the field. If the manuscript is deemed suitable for JIHSI, it proceeds to the peer-review stage. If not, it is "Desk Rejected" to allow authors to submit their work elsewhere without delay.

4. Selection of Reviewers
Manuscripts are sent to at least two independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, publication record, and lack of conflict of interest with the research or the authors.

5. Reviewer Evaluation
Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript based on several critical criteria:
•    Originality and significance of the research.
•    Rigorph of the methodological approach (e.g., textual analysis, fieldwork, or comparative framework).
•    Clarity of the theoretical argument.
•    Ethical compliance regarding human subjects or source material.

6. Editorial Decision
Based on the detailed reports provided by the reviewers, the Editor makes one of the following decisions:
•    Accept Submission: The manuscript is ready for publication as is.
•    Revisions Required (Minor/Major): The author must address specific concerns raised by reviewers before the manuscript can be reconsidered.
•    Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires significant restructuring and will undergo a second round of full peer review.
•    Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected and will not be published in JIHSI.

7. Final Approval and Production
If revisions are required, the Editor reviews the revised manuscript to ensure all points have been addressed. The final decision to publish resides with the Editor-in-Chief. Once accepted, the manuscript moves to the copyediting and layout stage to be prepared for publication