Peer Review Process

Social, Science, Mathematical, and Technical Education Review (SSMTER) applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, validity, and originality of all published articles.

Type of Peer Review

SSMTER uses a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. This approach is intended to ensure objectivity, fairness, and impartial evaluation of manuscripts.

Peer Review Workflow

  1. Initial Editorial Screening
    Upon submission, the manuscript is reviewed by the editorial team to assess its suitability with the journal’s scope, compliance with author guidelines, and originality (including plagiarism checking). Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.

  2. Assignment to Reviewers
    Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in social education, science education, mathematics education, or technical and vocational education.

  3. Peer Review Evaluation
    Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, relevance to the field, and contribution to knowledge. Reviewers provide constructive comments and recommendations.

  4. Editorial Decision
    Based on reviewers’ reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

    • Accept without revision

    • Accept with minor revisions

    • Revise and resubmit (major revisions)

    • Reject

  5. Revision by Authors
    Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in response to reviewers’ comments and submit a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed.

  6. Final Decision
    The editor evaluates the revised manuscript and may consult the reviewers again if necessary before making a final decision.

Review Timeframe

The peer review process typically takes 4–8 weeks, depending on the availability of reviewers and the extent of revisions required.

Confidentiality and Ethics

All manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers and editors are required to adhere to ethical standards, avoid conflicts of interest, and maintain the integrity of the review process.

Handling of Ethical Issues

If ethical issues such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or unethical research practices are suspected during the review process, the editorial board will follow established procedures to investigate and take appropriate actions.

Commitment to Quality

Through its peer review process, Social, Science, Mathematical, and Technical Education Review is committed to publishing high-quality scholarly research that contributes to the advancement of education in social sciences, science, mathematics, and technical fields.