Peer review is the cornerstone of academic publishing, ensuring that only high-quality, original, and ethically sound research is disseminated to the scholarly community. The Sri Guru Nanak Dev Education Trust - Journal of Research in Education and Social Sciences (SGNDET-JRESS) is committed to upholding rigorous academic standards by implementing a double-blind peer review system. Under this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation to ensure fairness, impartiality, and objectivity.

The journal recognizes that reviewers are essential to the advancement of knowledge. They serve as gatekeepers of academic integrity, helping validate research, improve manuscripts, and maintain the journal’s credibility.

Objectives of Peer Review

The peer review system of SGNDET-JRESS is designed to:

• Safeguard the integrity and originality of published work.

• Provide constructive, unbiased feedback to authors.

• Prevent the dissemination of plagiarized, unethical, or low-quality research.

• Maintain transparency and fairness in the editorial process.

• Contribute to the global exchange of knowledge in education and social sciences.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

1. Submission and Initial Editorial Assessment

• Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary check by the Editorial Office.
• The manuscript is screened for plagiarism (using Turnitin or equivalent software), compliance with author guidelines, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
• Manuscripts failing at this stage are desk-rejected, and authors are informed promptly.

2. Assignment to Reviewers

• Manuscripts passing the initial check are assigned to at least three to four expert reviewers, with one reviewer from India and two or three reviewers from overseas.
• The Editorial Board carefully selects reviewers based on subject expertise, research background, and absence of conflict of interest.

3. Double-Blind Review Process

• Reviewers remain unaware of the authors’ identities, and vice versa, throughout the evaluation.
• Each reviewer independently evaluates the manuscript and submits a confidential report.
• Where necessary, the Editors may seek additional opinions from further reviewers.

4. Evaluation Criteria - Reviewers are requested to assess manuscripts on:

• Originality: Novelty of research, contribution to knowledge, and innovation.
• Relevance: Alignment with the scope of education and social sciences.
• Clarity: Coherence of arguments, quality of language, and structure.
• Methodology: Scientific rigor, accuracy of data, and appropriateness of methods.
• Ethics: Compliance with ethical standards, citations, and avoidance of plagiarism.
• Significance: Impact of findings on the academic and professional community.

5.     Timeline -The review process typically takes 5-7 weeks,although complex or highly specialized manuscripts may require additional time. Authors are strongly advised not to submit their manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.

6. Editorial Decision - Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board make the final decision, which may result in:

• Acceptance (with or without minor revisions).
• Major Revisions required (authors resubmit revised work for further review).
• Resubmission as New Manuscript (substantial reworking required).
• Rejection (not suitable for publication in the journal).

7. Communication with Authors

• Authors receive a decision letter summarizing reviewers’ comments and recommendations.
• Authors of rejected manuscripts are notified promptly, and constructive feedback is provided wherever possible to support future improvement.

Confidentiality and Ethical Safeguards

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers and editors must not disclose, reproduce, or use any part of the manuscript for personal or professional gain.

Reviewers must declare any conflict of interest (academic, financial, or personal) before accepting a review assignment.

Manuscripts containing plagiarized or unethical content are rejected immediately, and in severe cases, the journal may contact the author’s affiliated institution or funding agency.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a central role in maintaining academic standards. They are expected to:

• Provide fair, objective, and timely evaluations.
• Avoid personal bias or discriminatory comments.
• Offer constructive feedback to help authors improve their work.
• Alert the Editor-in-Chief to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or ethical concerns.
• Maintain confidentiality and not disclose manuscript content to others.

Responsibilities of Authors during Review

Authors submitting to SGNDET-JRESS are expected to:

• Submit original work and properly acknowledge all sources.
• Refrain from multiple simultaneous submissions.
• Respond to reviewers’ and editors’ comments promptly and revise manuscripts accordingly.
• Respect the integrity of the peer review process and avoid attempting to influence reviewers or editors.

Post-Publication Review and Corrections

In rare cases where significant errors, ethical breaches, or plagiarism are identified after publication:

• The journal will conduct an investigation through a Fact-Finding Committee (FFC).
• If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions such as corrections, expressions of concern, or retraction of the article will be implemented.
• The author’s institution and funding agencies may be notified.

Commitment to Quality and Transparency

SGNDET-JRESS is committed to maintaining a robust peer review framework that:

• Ensures academic excellence and credibility.
• Protects the integrity of research dissemination.
• Provides an equitable and transparent evaluation platform for authors worldwide.
• Promotes scholarly dialogue and continuous improvement.

Through this policy, the journal affirms its dedication to upholding ethical publishing practices, rigorous academic scrutiny, and the advancement of education and social sciences globally.