To maintain the quality of the content and academic standards,  JISSER follows the Double-blind peer-review process. We are accepting the manuscript through OJS online submission. Which helps us to make the review process easy and fast. After the desk review process, If editors are found an ethical severe or significant issue in the submission then we will decline the submission. IJSSER research team will occasionally seek advice from outside reviewers with specific expertise.

The IJSSER Editors will recognize the reviewers' decisions based on their eligibility for publication. The authors will be notified of the review outcome, and they will get all relevant comments. Please note that all submissions will go through very competent and professional reviewers, therefore, the review decision is up to 8-10 weeks.

IJSSER’s editors are given high priority to the submission that is marked as new knowledge, framework, discoveries, under theories, methodology, and significant advances in findings.    

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

The peer reviewer's job is to read and evaluate a manuscript in their field of expertise, then provide authors with courteous, constructive, and honest feedback on their submission. It is permissible for the Peer Reviewer to highlight the article's strengths and faults, as well as ideas to improve the work's strength and quality, and to assess the manuscript's relevance and originality.

Abstract, title and references:

  • Title: Does it clearly describe the article?
  • Is the title informative and relevant?
  • Is the aim clear?
  • Is it clear what the study found and how they did it?
  • Is the abstract according to the journal format?
  • Are the references:
    • Relevant?
    • Recent?
    • Referenced correctly?
    • Are appropriate key studies included?

Introduction/ background

    • Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated?
    • Is it clear what is already known about this topic?
    • Is the research question clearly outlined?
    • Is the research question justified given what is already known about the topic?
    • Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context and explain what other authors' findings, if any, are being challenged or extended.
    • It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis(es) and the general experimental design or method.

Relationship to Literature:

  • Does the paper demonstrate an adequate understanding of the relevant literature in the field and cite an appropriate range of literature sources?
  • Is any significant work ignored?


  • Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected?
  • Is the design suitable for answering the question posed?
  • Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research?
  • Does the article identify the procedures followed?
  • Are these ordered in a meaningful way?
  • If the methods are new, are they explained in detail?
  • Was the sampling appropriate?
  • Have the equipment and materials been adequately described?
  • Is the process of subject selection clear?
  • Are the variables defined and measured appropriately?
  • Are the study methods valid and reliable?
  • Is there enough detail to replicate the study?
  • Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?


  • Is the data presented appropriately?
    • Tables and figures relevant and clearly presented?
    • Appropriate units, rounding, and the number of decimals?
    • Titles, columns, and rows labelled correctly and clearly?
    • Categories grouped appropriately?
  • Does the text in the results add to the data or is it repetitive?
  • Are you clear about what is a statistically significant result?
  • Are you clear about what is a practically meaningful result?


  • Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable?
  • Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?
  • Are the results discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being overinterpreted?
  • Do the conclusions answer the aims of the study?

Implications for research, practice and/or society:

  • Does the paper identify any implications for research, practice and/or society?
  • Does the paper bridge the gap between theory and practice?
  • How can the research be used in practice (economic and commercial impact), in teaching, to influence public policy, in research (contributing to the body of knowledge)?
  • What is the impact upon society (influencing public attitudes, affecting the quality of life)?
  • Are these implications consistent with the findings and conclusions of the paper?

Quality of Communication:

  • Does the paper clearly express its case, measured against the technical language of the field and the expected knowledge of the journal’s readership?
  • Has attention been paid to the clarity of expression and readability, such as sentence structure, jargon use, acronyms, etc?

Editors Decision

Based on the feedback from the Reviewers, the Editors will make one of the following decisions:

Accept: Without any additional adjustments, the text can move on to the next step of the editing process.

Minor Revisions: The paper has promise for publication, but it requires certain modifications before it can be considered for publishing.

Major Revisions: The manuscript has publication potential, but it requires specific modifications from the reviewers before it can be considered for publication.

Resubmit for Review: The manuscript has publication potential, but it requires significant modifications before it can be considered for publication and resubmit to the concerned reviewer. In this case, authors can reply to the comments from the reviewer.

Reject: The manuscript is not appropriate for publishing in this journal.

CopyRight: Following the approval of the paper, all authors sign a copyright agreement and accept responsibility for the correct and accurate information that will be published in IJSSER.

Publication: Following the final decision, the authors will receive the final galley proof file, and after the galley proof, the manuscript will be published on the IJSSER website (