Reviewer Guidelines

Peer review is the foundation of scholarly publishing. JSHE relies on the expertise and conscientiousness of its reviewers to ensure the quality, credibility, and integrity of every published article. Reviewers are valued members of the academic community and their contributions are formally acknowledged. Reviewers are expected to provide evaluations that are thorough, objective, constructive, and specific. A high-quality review helps authors understand how their work can be strengthened, regardless of the ultimate editorial outcome.

Reviewers are responsible for evaluating the manuscript's scientific validity, methodological rigour, originality, and contribution to the field. They must assess whether the conclusions are fully supported by the data and analysis presented, identify any statistical errors, inconsistencies, or unsupported claims, and check that figures, tables, and data presentations are clear and accurately labelled. Reviewers should also assess reference completeness, identify significant gaps in cited literature, and flag any ethical concerns — including undisclosed conflicts of interest, suspicious data, missing ethics statements, or suspected plagiarism. Reviews must be completed within the agreed timeframe, typically 14 to 21 days from the date of accepting the invitation.

A well-structured review report should begin with a summary of three to five sentences describing the study's objective, design, and principal findings, and stating whether the research question is important and the approach appropriate. This should be followed by Major Concerns — issues that must be addressed before the manuscript can be considered for publication, cited with specific line numbers where possible. Minor Concerns should then be listed — suggestions for improvement that do not affect the core validity of the work. Finally, a confidential Decision Recommendation should be provided to the handling editor: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject, accompanied by a rationale.

 Peer Review Process

JSHE operates a Double-Blind Peer Review process in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the entire review process. This model minimizes bias, protects reviewer independence, and ensures that manuscripts are evaluated solely on scientific merit.

When a manuscript is submitted through the OJS portal, an automated acknowledgement is issued to the corresponding author immediately with a Manuscript ID. Within five to seven business days, a Managing or Section Editor conducts an initial screening to assess scope fit, formatting compliance, plagiarism screening, completeness of ethics documentation, and minimum scientific quality. Manuscripts that pass screening are then assigned to two or three qualified reviewers within three to five days; invitations are sent along with the anonymized abstract. Reviewers have three to five days to accept or decline, and alternates are invited as needed. The review itself is expected to be completed within 14 to 21 days of acceptance.

Once all review reports have been received, the Associate Editor synthesizes the feedback and the Editor-in-Chief issues a decision — along with the full reviewer reports — within five to seven business days. Decisions include Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. Authors who receive a revision decision must submit their revised manuscript along with a detailed point-by-point response letter addressing every reviewer and editor comment. Minor revisions are typically re-assessed by the handling editor within seven to fourteen days; major revisions are re-evaluated by the original reviewers within the same timeframe. Following re-review, a final Accept or Reject decision is issued within five days, and accepted manuscripts proceed to production. Post-acceptance production — comprising copyediting, typesetting, DOI registration, author proofreading, and online publication — is completed within seven to fifteen days. JSHE targets a Submission-to-First-Decision turnaround of 21 to 35 days and an Acceptance-to-Publication time of 7 to 15 days.

Reviewer Ethics

JSHE adopts the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and expects all reviewers to adhere fully to these standards. Reviews must be conducted with complete objectivity, based solely on scientific merit and free from personal bias, ideological preference, or competitive self-interest. Personal criticism of authors is never acceptable under any circumstances.

Confidentiality is paramount. The manuscript and all of its contents are strictly confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disseminate any part of the manuscript to any third party — including colleagues, students, or collaborators — without the explicit written permission of the Editorial Office. Reviewers must not use unpublished ideas, data, methods, or conclusions from manuscripts they review for their own research or professional benefit prior to publication of that manuscript. If a reviewer discovers after accepting an invitation that they have a conflict of interest, they must immediately disclose this to the Editorial Office and recuse themselves if necessary. Any suspicion of misconduct — including plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate submission — must be reported immediately and confidentially to the Editorial Office. Reviewers must not attempt to investigate such matters independently.

Conflict of Interest Policy for Reviewers

A conflict of interest exists when a reviewer's ability to provide an impartial and unbiased evaluation may be compromised by a personal, professional, academic, institutional, or financial relationship with the authors or the subject matter of the manuscript. The existence of a conflict of interest does not imply wrongdoing — it is a structural situation that must be proactively managed.

Reviewers must decline an invitation to review if they are a current or recent (within the past three years) collaborator, co-author, supervisor, or supervisee of any listed author. They must also decline if they are employed by or affiliated with the same department or institution as any listed author, if they have a personal relationship with any author that could compromise their objectivity, if they have a direct financial interest in the results or conclusions of the manuscript, if they have publicly commented on or pre-reviewed any version of the manuscript, or if they have received the manuscript from the author through informal channels prior to the official review invitation. In any case of doubt, reviewers should declare the potential conflict to the Editorial Office and allow the editor to determine suitability. Erring on the side of disclosure is always the correct course of action.

Reviewer Registration

JSHE actively recruits qualified peer reviewers from all regions and disciplines within its scope. Joining the JSHE Reviewer Board is an opportunity to contribute to the quality of the scholarly record, engage with emerging research in your field, and receive formal recognition for your service. To be eligible, applicants must hold at minimum a Master's degree (doctoral qualification is strongly preferred) and must have at least three to five peer-reviewed publications in a field within the journal's scope. They must be active researchers or senior practitioners in a relevant discipline and must be able to complete reviews within 14 to 21 days of accepting an invitation.

To register, applicants should visit the JSHE Reviewer Registration Portal and complete the registration form with their name, title, institution, country, contact email, ORCID iD, areas of expertise selected from the journal's scope list, and their methodology expertise (quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods, systematic review, or meta-analysis). Applicants should upload their current CV in PDF format or provide a link to their ResearchGate, Google Scholar, or ORCID profile. The Editorial Office reviews applications within 7 to 10 business days and confirms acceptance by email. Registered reviewers receive an official digital Reviewer Certificate (JSHE-branded PDF) per review upon request, are named in the annual Reviewer Acknowledgement list published in the journal, and are given priority consideration for guest editorship of special issues