American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research follows double blinded peer review process. A double-blind peer review process is an essential component of maintaining the quality and integrity of academic journals. It helps ensure that submitted manuscripts are rigorously evaluated by experts in the field without bias. Here's a step-by-step guide to a double-blind peer review process for a journal:

Step 1: Submission

1. Authors submit their manuscripts to the journal's online submission system, ensuring that all identifying information about the authors is removed from the manuscript itself. This includes names, affiliations, and acknowledgments.

Step 2: Initial Screening

2. The journal's editorial team conducts an initial screening to ensure that the manuscript adheres to the journal's guidelines, including formatting and ethical considerations. If the manuscript doesn't meet these criteria, it may be desk-rejected.

Step 3: Assignment of Reviewers

3. The editor-in-chief or handling editor selects two or more expert reviewers in the relevant field. Reviewers should be knowledgeable in the subject matter of the manuscript but have no conflict of interest with the authors.

Step 4: Reviewer Invitation

4. Reviewers are invited to assess the manuscript. They receive a blinded version of the manuscript, usually with all author information redacted, to prevent them from knowing the authors' identities.

Step 5: Review Process

5. Reviewers evaluate the manuscript for its scientific quality, significance, methodology, clarity, and ethical considerations. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations for improvement.

Step 6: Reviewer Reports

6. Reviewers submit their reports to the journal's editorial team. The reports should include comments and recommendations for acceptance, revision, or rejection.

Step 7: Decision

7. Based on the reviewer reports, the editor-in-chief or handling editor makes a decision about the manuscript. This decision can be:
   • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication without major revisions.
   • Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript requires revisions based on the reviewers' feedback before it can be reconsidered for publication.
   • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards and is not suitable for publication.

Step 8: Author Notification

8. Authors receive a decision letter that summarizes the reviewers' comments and the editorial decision. If revisions are required, authors are provided with a clear list of the revisions needed.

Step 9: Revisions (if applicable)

9. Authors have the opportunity to revise their manuscript based on the reviewers' feedback and submit a revised version.

Step 10: Re-review (if applicable)

10. If revisions were requested, the revised manuscript is sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation. Reviewers ensure that the authors have adequately addressed their concerns.

Step 11: Final Decision

11. The editor-in-chief or handling editor makes the final decision based on the revised manuscript and the reviewers' comments.

Step 12: Publication

12. If accepted, the manuscript is prepared for publication in the journal, and the authors' identities are added back to the manuscript.

By following this double-blind peer review process, our journals maintain high standards of quality, reduce bias, and ensure that only the most rigorous and relevant research is published.