Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Salesian Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (SJHSS)follows a double-blind twin review policy.

Given below are general guidelines and roadmap for Peer Reviewers. These guidelines are further supplemented by the detailed guidelines given by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), which could be accessed at

When Approached for Review
  • Respond within a reasonable time-frame (preferably within 7 days) as to your availability for doing the review.
  • Do an initial reading of the article. Agree to do the review only if you have the required expertise on the topic dealt with in the article.
  • If you do not have the expertise and you know another scholar who would be a better choice for the review, inform the Journal Editor of the same and pass on the contact details of the other scholar.
  • Be committed to completing the review and submitting the review report within the time-frame mutually agreed upon with the Journal Editor.
  • Declare any potential conflict of interest with the author (whose identity may be guessed even when identification details have been removed from the article) or with any matter discussed in the article, which might compromise your objectivity. Inform the Editor of the same and go by his decision.
  • Being a reviewer is an honorary service, with no financial compensation offered by Salesian College Sonada & Siliguri. However, you will receive a free copy of the issue of the journal in which the article that you were asked to review may be published. Further, SCS will issue, upon written request, a certificate acknowledging your membership and its duration in the roster of Peer Reviewers.
  • The inclusion in the Roster of Peer Reviewers will be, initially, for a period of three years. It may be renewed on a mutual, satisfactory assessment of your services.
During the Review
  • While reviewing, if you realize that you do not have the expertise to evaluate some of the contents or if any conflict of interest becomes discernible, inform the Editor immediately and follow his instructions.
  • Do not involve any other person in the review process, unless the reviewer has informed the Editor about the need to include another person with expertise and received permission for the same. Include the collaborating reviewer’s name and details in the review report.
  • Keep the manuscript and all review details confidential.
  • If any ethical violation or plagiarism is noted in the manuscript, inform the Editor of the same.
  • Complete the review and submit the review report within the time agreed upon with the Editor.
Preparing the Report
  •  Respond to the review parameters specified by the Editor. Prepare the report keeping in mind that the Editor is dependent on the reviewer for subject knowledge, sound judgment, and an objective assessment of the quality and publication-worthiness of the manuscript.
  • Use the template provided by the Editor.
  • Ensure that the language of the review is objective, professional, and free of any derogatory comments or unfounded accusations.
  • Be specific in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, and wherever possible, support your claims with evidence.
  • Prepare the report (following the template) with three different sections: the primary section, addressing the author wherein the reviewer will present his or her assessment; and a second section (if required) addressed to the Editor and marked as confidential. The third section will be the final recommendation by the reviewer. The first section addressed to the author, will be passed on to the author for the purpose of supporting the decision of the Editor informing the author of any one of the three decisions: the manuscript is accepted as-is/ revision and resubmission are required/is rejected.
  • No identifying information of the reviewer will be passed on to the author.
After the Review
  •  Upon publication of the article, the identity of the reviewer shall continue to remain confidential. The reviewer shall not reveal his or her identity to the author.
  • The reviewer shall keep the details of the manuscript and its review confidential.
  • After review and publication, if any significant information regarding the manuscript comes to the knowledge of the reviewer, the same shall be communicated to the Editor.
  • Cooperate with the Editor on any further requests regarding the manuscript reviewed.
  • The reviewer shall acquaint himself or herself with the detailed guidelines provided by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), which is available at
Salesian College, Sonada was accredited by NAAC on 16 September 2004 and was given the Grade C++ (Institutional Score between 65-70%). On 26 February 2010 Salesian College has been conferred the status of a College with Potential for Excellence (CPE) by UGC, New Delhi, and into its 2nd Cycle from 1st April 2014. In March 2012, the College was re-accredited by NAAC with ‘A’ Grade (CGPA of 3.16 out of 4) to be the first College to receive such grade under the University of North Bengal.
The College retained its A Grade under the New stringent Format of Accreditation in May 2019 and it is valid till 2024.
Salesian Publications, Salesian Research Institute, and Salesian Translation Centre offer opportunities for capacity building for aspiring teaching and research personnel of the region. Salesian College Extension Activities Centre has trained and placed over 600 youth of the region in collaboration with the Ministry of Rural Development and Don Bosco Tech, New Delhi. Salesian College invites young people and their parents to partner in nurturing an ideal society.