Journal of Junior Sociological Reviews

JOURNAL POLICIES

COPYRIGHT POLICY
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.


DIGITAL PRESERVATION
The journal is committed to preserving published scholarly research in perpetuity. All articles published by the journal are preserved by Zenodo, one of the largest community-supported digital archives dedicated to the long-term preservation of scholarly literature. Zenodo provides a permanent archive for electronic scholarly journals, as well as e-books, digitized historical collections, and other digital content. By working with Zenodo, we ensure that the content published in our journal is preserved and remain accessible to future generations of scholars, researchers, and students. The published work also preserved at google and Microsoft storage accounts on the permanent basis as well as on the website archives.

PUBLICATION ETHICS
 Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
 The work should be entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
 Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
 The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
 An individual who has made considerable academic contributions to a scientific investigation, for example, one who contributes significantly, to the conception, design, execution, analysis and interpretation of the data, participates in drafting, reviewing or revising the manuscript for intellectual content and approves the manuscript to be published can be considered an author.
 If there are multiple authors in an article, one author should be designated as the Corresponding Author, who assumes overall responsibility for the manuscript.
 All co-authors of a publication are responsible for providing consent authorship to the Corresponding Author, should contribute in the research work, take responsibility for appropriate portions of the content, acknowledging that they have reviewed and approved the manuscript.
 Guest (symbolic), gift (an individual who has not contributed to the research work) and ghost authors are inconsistent with the definition of authorship, and are unacceptable.

PLAGIARISM POLICY
Plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior and will not be tolerated by the journal. Submitted works must represent original research and ideas. The authors should appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others.
The journal defines plagiarism as the use of third party material without crediting its source. This includes, but is not limited to:


• Copying verbatim text, images, or ideas without proper attribution
• Paraphrasing content without proper citation
• Self-plagiarism - reusing significant portions of the author's prior published work without acknowledging the source
Suspected cases of plagiarism in submitted or published papers will be investigated thoroughly. If plagiarism is found, the journal will contact the author(s) and their institution(s). Serious cases or repeat offenses may result in a formal retraction of the published paper, public notification of the misconduct, and potential bans on future publication in the journal.


To prevent plagiarism, the journal advises all authors to:


• Enclose direct quotes in quotation marks with the exact source.
• Paraphrase content in your own words and style.
• Cite sources within the text and provide complete details in the references.
• Check final manuscript using plagiarism detection software.
• Ensure figures, tables, and data have the proper attribution.
• Disclose if material has been published previously by the authors.
By submitting to this journal, authors acknowledge that their work may be screened against plagiarism databases and that clear cases of plagiarism will result in penalties. The journal is committed to maintaining the originality and academic integrity of all published articles.
CITATION MANIPULATION POLICY
The journal aims to uphold the highest publication ethics standards regarding citation practices. Citation manipulation, also known as coercive citation, refers to inappropriately influencing an author to cite a particular article. The journal defines citation manipulation as unethical editorial conduct.
The journal does not require or coerce authors to cite articles from the journal itself, or specific journals, agencies, or authors as a condition of review or publication. Authors are asked to follow standard citation practices for their field and cite works pertinent to their research. Any suggestions regarding relevant literature or corrections during peer review should be based on merit, devoid of coercive or self-serving incentives.
If an editor is found to be engaging in citation manipulation practices, penalties will apply based on the severity of the misconduct. This includes but is not limited to:
 Formal notice and reprimand
 Suspension or termination from the editorial board
 Retraction of influenced publications
 Public notification to authors and readers
The journal recognizes that influencing citation practices distorts the scientific record and peer review process. As part of our commitment to publication ethics and integrity, the practice is unacceptable to the journal. Authors or reviewers who feel subject to inappropriate citation influence may report confidentially to the publisher or editorial board. By promoting ethical citation norms, the journal aims to protect the scholarly process and record.
POLICIES ON HUMAN SUBJECTS RESEARCH
The journal expects all authors to uphold ethical standards in research involving human subjects. Authors must confirm that the study obtained appropriate institutional review board (IRB) approval and was conducted according to established guidelines such as the Declaration of Helsinki.
1. Informed Consent
Participation in research must be voluntary and informed. Authors must obtain consent from participants after fully disclosing the study's purposes, risks, benefits, experimental procedures, time commitments, funding sources, potential conflicts of interest, incentives, confidentiality protections, and any other relevant aspects. For research with children or legally incompetent subjects, consent must be obtained from their legally authorized representative. The journal reserves the right to request documentation of consent procedures from authors.
2. Privacy and Confidentiality
The authors must protect participant privacy and confidentiality. Personal identifiers should be removed from datasets. Any inclusion of details like participant names, images, or videos requires explicit consent. Authors must describe confidentiality procedures and confirm data was securely handled.


3. Potential Harms and Benefits
There should be clear scientific objectives that justify research risks and burdens to participants. Risks should be minimized through study design. For vulnerable groups, extra safeguards are warranted against undue influence and denial of services. Editors reserve the right to reject research with disproportionate risks.
4. Accuracy and Transparency
The authors must not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data or study findings. They should disclose all relevant study limitations and enable reproducibility where applicable by sharing materials, protocols, software, and data. Omitting critical details or withholding data access may constitute unethical behavior.


The journal may conduct additional ethical reviews and request more information or changes to the manuscript. Clear violations will result in rejection or retraction of the publication. Following ethical human subjects principles is paramount to upholding research integrity.
Here is a sample comprehensive order for organizing manuscripts submitted to the GEAN journal:


MANUSCRIPT STRUCTURE


1. Title Page
 Concise, descriptive title
 Author names and affiliations
 Corresponding author contact information


2. Abstract


Summary of key points: background, methods, results, conclusions
 150-250 words


3. Keywords


 5-10 keywords representing topics covered


4. Introduction
 Research background and context
 Purpose and significance of study
 Gaps in existing literature


5. Literature Review
 Synthesis of relevant prior research
 Theoretical frameworks used
 Derivation of study hypotheses, question, or objectives


6. Methods


 Details of study design, data collection tools, sampling, variables measured
 Sufficient details for reproducibility
 Statistical analysis techniques used


7. Results
 Present study findings in logical order using text, figures, and tables
 Report on all described analyses
 No subjective interpretation of results in this section


8. Discussion
 Interpret and discuss study findings
 Compare with prior literature
 Note study limitations and suggestions for future research


9. Conclusions
 Succinct summary of overall findings
 Implications for research and practice
 Take-home message


10. References
 Cited in text and compiled at end
 Check for accuracy and consistent style


11. Supplementary Materials (if applicable)


Figures and Tables
 Embedded at suitable points within text
 Legends explain abbreviations and symbols
 Self-contained and comprehensible without reading text
Following these guidelines helps organize your paper clearly for editorial review and publication. Adherence to the journal's style and formatting requirements is also advised.
However, authors may follow their own manuscript style according to the suitability of the manuscript
REVIEW PROCESS
Papers submitted to the Review of Gender Equity Advancement Network undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process designed to ensure scholarly rigor and integrity.
Upon submission, the editor-in-chief conducts an initial screening to check if the paper aligns with the journal's aims and scope and meets basic quality thresholds. Papers passing initial screening are assigned to an associate editor with expertise in the topic. The associate editor identifies at least two independent reviewers who are leading scholars in the paper's subject area. The reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the authors or work. The identity of authors and reviewers is kept confidential during the entire process. Reviewers are asked to evaluate technical quality, originality, validity of methodology, significance to the field, and quality of writing. Reviewers can recommend acceptance, revisions, or rejection along with comments for authors. The associate editor considers the reviewers' recommendations and decides whether to accept the paper as is, request minor or major revisions, or reject the paper.
For revised manuscripts, reviewers may be asked to evaluate whether their comments have been adequately addressed by the authors. Revised papers may go through multiple rounds of review if needed. Once revisions are complete, the associate editor makes a final determination on acceptance/rejection and notifies the editor-in-chief. Accepted papers are subject to editorial input and copyediting prior to publication. Rejected manuscripts may be resubmitted after substantial reworking, but are not guaranteed acceptance. This rigorous peer review process ensures that published papers in the journal report significant advances based on valid methodology. Our blind review safeguards impartial evaluation and inclusion of diverse perspectives.
TIMELINE EXPECTATIONS
The journal strives to complete the peer review process and communicate decisions in a timely manner. The following timelines provide guidance on what authors can expect:
Initial screening: Within 1 week of submission, the editor-in-chief will conduct an initial screening and check if the manuscript aligns with journal scopes and policies.
Reviewer assignment: Within 2 weeks of passing initial screening, the associate editor will identify at least two expert reviewers and invite them to evaluate the submission.
Review completion: Reviewers are requested to submit their evaluation within 2-4 weeks of accepting the invitation. The journal understands reviewers have other professional duties and may need additional time on occasion.
Associate editor decision: Within 1-2 weeks of receiving the reviewers' evaluations, the associate editor will make a decision to accept, request revisions, or reject the submission.
Revision review: For revised manuscripts, the associate editor may request the original reviewers assess if their comments have been adequately addressed, normally within 2 weeks of the resubmission.


Final decision: After the peer review process is complete, the associate editor will make a final determination and notify the authors and editor-in-chief, aiming for within 1 week of the latest review iteration.
Publication: Accepted manuscripts are typically published online in the journal within 8-12 weeks of final acceptance.
The journal makes every effort to adhere to these general timelines for each submission. Authors will be kept informed of the status and delays should arise due to reviewer availability or other factors. Our goal is to provide authors with timely, constructive feedback through an efficient review process.