Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research (IJSSR) implement each accepted manuscript will go through a review process by the Editor and reviewers, using a Double blind Peer-Review Process, which the reviewer does not know the identity of the author, and the author did not know the identity of the review

IJSSR implement policies Double Blind Peer-Review, every manuscript received will be sent to Reviewers who registered in The Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen dan Bisnis. The review process lasts a maximum of up to 60 (sixty) days with the allocation of time given to each reviewer to complete its review process is a maximum of ten (10) working days. If the partners designated bestari previously not able to finish his review work within the time limit specified then chairman of the Chairman of Editorial Board will appoint a replacement to do a review Reviewers manuscript.

In the review process, reviewers provide considerations relating to compatibility between the title, abstract, introduction, discussion (results) and conclusion. In addition reviewer also give consideration associated with novelty, scientific impact and references used

Review Process:

1. Author submit the manuscript
2. Editor Evaluation [some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process]
3. Double-blind peer review process
4. Editor Decision (Acceptend Submission, Revisions Required, Resubmit For Review, Decline Submission)
5. Confirmation to the authors

Final decision of articles acceptance will be made by Editors according to reviewers comments. Publication of accepted articles including the sequence of published articles will be made by Editor in Chief by considering sequence of accepted date and geographical distribution of authors.



Indonesian Journal of Social Science Research (IJSSR) provide membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as an option for all of its journal editors. COPE has developed Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, to which Editors and their editorial boards can refer for guidance.

Read the COPE guidelines below or visit their website to download the PDF. Peer reviewers play a role in ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. The peer review process depends to a large extent on the trust and willing participation of the scholarly community and requires that everyone involved behaves responsibly and ethically. Peer reviewers play a central and critical part in the peer review process, but may come to the role without any guidance and be unaware of their ethical obligations. Journals have an obligation to provide transparent policies for peer review, and reviewers have an obligation to conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. Clear communication between the journal and the reviewers is essential to facilitate consistent, fair and timely review. COPE has heard cases from its members related to peer review issues and bases these guidelines, in part, on the collective experience and wisdom of the COPE Forum participants. It is hoped they will provide helpful guidance to researchers, be a reference for editors and publishers in guiding their reviewers, and act as an educational resource for institutions in training their students and researchers. Peer review, for the purposes of these guidelines, refers to reviews provided on manuscript submissions to journals, but can also include reviews for other platforms and apply to public commenting that can occur pre- or post-publication. Reviews of other materials such as preprints, grants, books, conference proceeding submissions, registered reports (preregistered protocols), or data will have a similar underlying ethical framework, but the process will vary depending on the source material and the type of review requested. The model of peer review will also influence elements of the process.