Frontline Social Sciences and History Journal (FSSHJ)

The Editorial Board of Frontline Social Sciences and History Journal (FSSHJ) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing, academic integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct. These Editorial Guidelines define the responsibilities of editors and outline the principles governing editorial decision-making and manuscript handling.

Purpose of the Editorial Board

The Editorial Board is responsible for:

  • Maintaining the academic quality of the journal.
  • Ensuring a fair and transparent peer-review process.
  • Promoting ethical publishing practices.
  • Supporting authors, reviewers, and readers.
  • Enhancing the scholarly impact and reputation of the journal.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently and without influence from:

  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • Sponsors
  • Advertisers
  • Institutions
  • Funding organizations

All decisions are based solely on the academic merit, originality, significance, and relevance of submitted manuscripts.

Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are expected to:

Maintain Quality Standards

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality
  • Academic significance
  • Methodological rigor
  • Clarity of presentation
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

Ensure Fair Evaluation

Manuscripts must be assessed without discrimination based on:

  • Nationality
  • Gender
  • Race
  • Religious beliefs
  • Political views
  • Institutional affiliation

Protect Confidentiality

Editors must:

  • Treat all submissions as confidential.
  • Not disclose manuscript information to unauthorized individuals.
  • Respect the anonymity of authors and reviewers in the double-blind review process.

Promote Ethical Publishing

Editors shall actively prevent:

  • Plagiarism
  • Duplicate publication
  • Data fabrication
  • Data falsification
  • Citation manipulation
  • Authorship misconduct

Any suspected misconduct will be investigated according to internationally recognized ethical standards and COPE recommendations.

Initial Manuscript Assessment

Before peer review, editors evaluate whether a manuscript:

  • Fits the aims and scope of the journal.
  • Meets submission requirements.
  • Demonstrates sufficient scholarly quality.
  • Complies with ethical standards.
  • Contains appropriate references and citations.

Manuscripts failing to meet these requirements may be returned to authors or declined without external review.

Peer Review Management

The journal follows a Double-Blind Peer Review system.

Editors are responsible for:

  • Selecting qualified reviewers.
  • Monitoring the review process.
  • Ensuring reviewer confidentiality.
  • Evaluating reviewer recommendations objectively.
  • Resolving conflicting reviewer opinions when necessary.

Editors may seek additional reviews when required.

Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions are based on:

  • Reviewer recommendations.
  • Scientific and scholarly merit.
  • Originality and significance.
  • Ethical compliance.
  • Journal standards and policies.

Possible editorial decisions include:

  • Accept Submission
  • Minor Revisions Required
  • Major Revisions Required
  • Resubmit for Review
  • Reject Submission

The Editor-in-Chief retains final authority regarding publication decisions.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest.

Editors should not handle manuscripts when:

  • Personal relationships exist with authors.
  • Financial interests may influence judgment.
  • Professional relationships could affect impartiality.

In such cases, another editor will be assigned to manage the manuscript.

Corrections and Retractions

When significant errors or ethical concerns are identified, editors may:

  • Publish corrections.
  • Issue expressions of concern.
  • Retract articles.
  • Remove content when legally required.

All corrective actions will be conducted transparently to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Communication with Authors

Editors should:

  • Communicate professionally and respectfully.
  • Provide clear editorial decisions.
  • Ensure reviewer comments are transmitted accurately.
  • Offer constructive guidance when revisions are required.

Responsibilities Toward Reviewers

Editors should:

  • Select reviewers based on expertise.
  • Respect reviewer confidentiality.
  • Provide sufficient review instructions.
  • Recognize reviewers’ contributions to the journal.

Responsibilities Toward Readers

Editors must strive to ensure that published content:

  • Meets scholarly standards.
  • Is accurate and reliable.
  • Contributes meaningfully to academic knowledge.
  • Complies with ethical and professional publishing practices.

Publication Ethics

The journal follows the ethical principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editors are expected to uphold these principles throughout the editorial and publication process.

Continuous Improvement

The Editorial Board regularly reviews journal policies and procedures to improve:

  • Publication quality.
  • Editorial efficiency.
  • Peer-review effectiveness.
  • Author experience.
  • Ethical compliance.

Commitment to Academic Excellence

The Editorial Board of Frontline Social Sciences and History Journal is dedicated to maintaining a fair, transparent, ethical, and high-quality publication environment that supports the advancement of research in social sciences, humanities, history, and interdisciplinary studies.