Guidelines

MJHSS highly appreciates your kind support by agreeing to review an article for our journal. Before you consent to evaluate any paper, you are requested to consider a number of points.

• If the paper is not in your area of research interest and expertise, please inform the editor and feel free to refuse to review it.
• If you have no free time to evaluate the paper before the deadline, kindly inform the editor.
• You are kindly requested to provide a detailed and thorough report concerning the manuscript under review based on the guidelines below.

Conflicts of Interests

When manuscripts are assigned to reviewers for peer-reviews, reviewers must disclose to editors or managing editors any conflicts of interest that could bias their reviews of the manuscript.

Writing Your Review Report

Reviewers are welcome to write detailed review reports based on the previous guidelines. The review report is vital in helping the editors to make final decisions. Review reports should be specific enough for authors to respond, including the critiques of the quality of the data, the level of support for the conclusion, figures and tables, etc. (referring to lines if specific enough).

Review Rating

Reviewers rate articles based on the following aspects:

APPROPRIATENESS: How would you rate the appropriateness of this paper to the journal?

CLARITY: For the reasonably well-prepared reader, is it clear what was done and why? Is the paper well-written and well-structured? How would you rate the quality of this paper?

ORIGINALITY: Does it address a new problem or one that has received little attention? Alternatively, does it present significant benefits? How would you rate the originality of the content of this paper?

SUBSTANCE: Does this paper have enough substance? Does it benefit from its methodology and results?

SIGNIFICANCE: How would you rate the significance this paper contributes to the journal?

IMPACT OF RESULTS: How would you rate the results and the supporting evidence technically of this paper?

LANGUAGE: Is the paper written in a good language, well prepared and organized?

Recommendations

Recommendations are provided as follows:

Accept Submission: The paper is accepted without any changes

Minor Revision: The paper is in principle accepted after revision based on the reviewer’s comments. Authors are given one week for minor revisions.

Major Revision: The acceptance of the manuscript would depend on the revisions. The author needs to provide a point by point response or provide a rebuttal if some of the reviewer’s comments cannot be revised. Usually, only one round of major revisions is allowed. Authors will be asked to resubmit the revised paper within three weeks and the revised version will be returned to the reviewers for further comments.

Decline: The article has serious flaws, makes no original contribution, and the paper is rejected with no offer of resubmission to the journal.

Reviewer Joining Procedure

Millennium sincerely welcomes experts and scholars to cooperate with us as editors and reviewers of the articles being considered for publication in the journal.

Recognition of Reviewers: Reviewers who provide timely, thorough peer-review reports receive vouchers entitling them to a discount on the APC of their next publication in Millennium in appreciation of the work done.

How to Apply? If you are interested to be a reviewer with Millennium, please download the Reviewer Application form, fill it up, and send it to the Editorial Office at editormjhss@gmail.com. You will be informed of the decision within two weeks of your submission.