Policy Document

Introduction of Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS), is an interdisciplinary, blind peer-reviewed, open access journal published under International Centre for Sustainable Development and Research (SMC-Private) Limited (CUI No. 0266199). The journal is dedicated to advancing knowledge and fostering critical discussions across various fields of social sciences. Our mission is to provide an open platform for researchers, scholars, and practitioners to exchange ideas, explore new perspectives, and contribute to the ongoing dialogue about societal challenges and opportunities. The primary aim of Dialogues in Digital Society is to stimulate open and critical debate on emerging issues and theories relating to our understanding of societies.

The journal publishes a wide range of original research articles, theoretical essays, and reviews that address pressing social issues at both local and global levels. The journal encourages innovative research that transcends traditional boundaries, promoting collaborations that aim to deepen understanding of the complexities of social dynamics and human behavior.

Frequency of Publication

The frequency and regularity are the main requirements that directly influence the credibility of journals. In this connection, Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) publication schedule comprises one (01) volume with two (02) issues each year on a regular basis with the following description.

1^st Issue January - June

2^nd issue July - December

About the Journal

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is a scholarly journal designed to stimulate academic discourse and interdisciplinary collaboration within the vast landscape of social sciences. The journal aims to bridge the gap between diverse disciplines, providing a forum where sociologists, social workers, legal practitioners, psychologists, criminologists, anthropologists, economists, political scientists, and other social science professionals can engage in meaningful dialogue.

We prioritize research that challenges conventional thinking and offers new insights into societal issues, ranging from social policy and human behavior to global development and cultural transformations. Through rigorous peer review and a commitment to academic excellence, Dialogues in Humanities Social Sciences seeks to contribute to the advancement of knowledge and the creation of solutions that address contemporary social challenges.

Mission

The mission of Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences is to foster intellectual engagement and collaboration across the diverse fields of social sciences. We are committed to advancing interdisciplinary research that addresses complex societal challenges and promotes equitable, inclusive, and sustainable solutions. By providing a platform for innovative ideas and critical discussions, we aim to contribute to the development of knowledge that informs policy, enhances social understanding, and improves the well-being of communities worldwide.

Aim & Scope

The primary aim of Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is to cultivate and encourage new, exciting, stimulating, and often unusual and unprecedented debates across the discipline of social Sciences, and across all the many parts of the world where social sciences is practised.

The journal aims to be a central node for debate-creation and knowledge-formation. It seeks to both reflect and cover current debates in and across the field, while also provoking new ones too. It allows groups of authors to thematize debates that are emerging or have yet only been carried out implicitly. The journal also aims to create a dynamic platform for the dissemination of high-quality, interdisciplinary research that addresses the pressing social, economic, political, and cultural challenges facing societies today. The journal welcomes contributions from a broad range of social science disciplines, including but not limited to sociology, anthropology, political science and international relations, criminology, social work, law, economics, media and communication studies, education, and psychology etc.

We are particularly interested in research that crosses traditional disciplinary boundaries, engages with contemporary theoretical debates, and offers new insights into global and local issues such as inequality, governance, human rights, environmental sustainability, and social justice. Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences seeks to publish work that not only contributes to academic knowledge but also has practical implications for policymakers, practitioners, and communities.

Audience

Our readership includes academics and researchers in the fields of law and social sciences, legal professionals, law students, and policymakers interested in the empirical and theoretical analysis of society and its institutions.

Open Access

We are proud to be an open-access journal, providing unrestricted online access to our content to support a greater global exchange of knowledge. This aligns with our belief that free access to scholarly research supports a greater global exchange of information and has the power to amplify the impact of research across borders and among diverse academic and practical communities.

Submitting to the Journal

DHSS welcome submissions that advance the fields of social sciences. For submission guidelines and deadlines, please visit the journal page. The review process is rigorous, ensuring that only the highest quality research is published.

Submit your manuscript to the Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences at farhatullah@kust.edu.pk

Publication Process

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) uses Open Journal Systems (OJS), which is an open-source journal management and publishing software developed, supported, and freely distributed by the Public Knowledge Project under the GNU General Public License. All articles submitted for possible publication in DHSS will be processed through the process detailed below:

Authority Registration

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS), ISSN (XXX-XXX) is an esteemed academic journal published under International Centre for Sustainable Development and Research (SMC-Private) Limited (CUI No. 0266199),

Privacy Statement

Information provided at the Dialogues in humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) site by authors such as names, email addresses, contact, etc. will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Conflicts Of Interests

DHSS is committed to ensuring the disclosure of competing interests in published manuscripts. The author(s) may have a potential conflict of interests that could affect or be seen to affect their manuscript. Therefore, the author(s) must declare a conflict-of-interest statement during the manuscript submission, enabling a written statement to be recorded within the paginated published article. A potential conflicting interest might arise from the relationships, allegiances, or hostilities to particular groups, organizations, or interests, which may influence excessively one’s judgments or actions. The issue is particularly sensitive when such interests are private and/or may result in personal gain. Examples of conflicts of interest might include, but are not limited to, receiving fees for consulting, receiving research funding, being employed by a related company holding stocks or shares in a company that might be affected by the manuscript, or having received funds or reimbursement for attending a related symposium or talk. If there are other interests that the reasonable reader might feel have affected the research, the author(s) must declare it at least before acceptance of the manuscript. The manuscripts are evaluated relatively and accepted when competing interests are not declared until necessary by the policy. The editorial team does not expect details of the financial arrangements to be disclosed when a competing interest is declared. The author(s) must check the Manuscript Submission Guidelines to ensure compliance with the specific requirements needed by the journal. The author(s) are required to certify at a particular stage that:

All forms of financial support are given due acknowledgment in the contribution.
Any commercial or financial involvement that might present a conflict of interest related to the contribution is recorded during submission.
Any potential conflict of interest shall be discussed with the Editor to decide whether its information will be disclosed in the manuscript.
The author(s) did not sign any agreement with any sponsor of the research submitted to the journal that prevents the author(s) from publishing both positive and negative results or that forbids the author(s) from publishing the research without prior approval of the sponsor.
The author(s) have checked the manuscript submission guidelines for a Declaration of Conflicting Interests requirement and have complied with specified requirements.

The author(s) must include such a declaration at the end of the manuscript after any acknowledgments and before the Funding Acknowledgement, Notes (if relevant), and References under the heading ‘Declaration of Conflicting Interest.’ If no conflict exists, please state that ‘The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest’. The same obligations apply to the editors or guest editors writing an editorial that will be published in the journal and to the peer reviewers, where applicable.

Copyrights and Licensing

DHSS operates based on a non-exclusive publishing agreement. Under this agreement, the journal retains the right of first publication, but authors are free to subsequently publish their work. The copyright of all work rests with the author(s). By default, all content published in DHSS is licensed under the International Centre for Sustainable Development and Research (ICSDR). This license permits users to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the article provided that the authors are the original creators and that the reuse is restricted to non-commercial purposes, i.e., is attributed to research or educational use. Authors are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the various Creative Commons licenses. Readers are advised to consult the licensing information embedded in each published work to ensure they are familiar with the applicable terms of use.

Announcements

We are inviting papers for the Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS). You are requested to submit your manuscript to the Online Journal System or email your paper to the editor@dialogueshss.com

If you have any queries, please feel free to contact us.

Contact

Publisher Name: International Centre for Sustainable Development & Research

Guidelines

Review Process

Submitted manuscripts are reviewed for originality, significance, adequacy of documentation, reader interest and composition. Note: In the event that a journal’s editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal, the publisher or editor shall follow COPE’s guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.

Manuscripts not submitted according to instructions will be returned to the author for correction prior to the beginning of the processing.
All manuscripts are subject to a similarity check using the Turnitin service.
Articles with an overall similarity index greater than 19% or with a similarity index from a single source exceeding 3% are subject to clarification and/or correction.
All articles are initially reviewed by the members of Editorial Board, for adequacy and relevancy of the manuscript to the policies and guidelines of the Research Mosaic journal.
Revised manuscripts are judged on the adequacy of responses to suggestions and criticisms made during the initial review.
Manuscripts are then forwarded to two external peer reviewers and statistical reviewers.
The pee-review process is double-blinded.
Each manuscript will further be checked for technical, epidemiological, statistical, ethical and language corrections.
All parts of accepted manuscripts are subject to editing for scientific accuracy and clarity by the office of the Editor.
The editorial board of Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) holds the right to a final decision of accepting or rejecting any article from publications in the journal at all stages.

Guidelines for Authors

Author guidelines comprise the following bibliographic and formatting standards together with instances of common citation formats preferred to use in submissions.

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) considers articles submitted via an open journal system that could be accessed through the journal’s website www.dialogueshss.com.
Authors are required to get registered through Open Journal System prior to submission of the manuscript to the DHSS.
Once registered, authors are advised to follow the submission guidelines and ensure to have formatted manuscript according to format that the Journal follows.
Once the manuscript is received online via OJS, desk editors will filter the manuscript in the light of Author Guidelines. Based on desk review, the manuscript is either sent back to the author(s) for further modifications or sent for review.
It is author(s)’ responsibility to ensure that the manuscript has neither been published nor been submitted for publication either in parts or as a whole.
Manuscripts must be written in clear, concise, grammatically correct language, and formatted according to APA Editorial Style.

Guidelines for Reviews

Reviewers bear the responsibility for objectivity, professionalism, impartiality, and confidentiality in the assessment of content quality.

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) follows a double-blind peer-review process. Where the identities of authors and reviewers are hidden from each other. Its purpose is to improve the quality of content and of the scientific material under review that is ultimately published. Conscientious review is a time-consuming effort but is essential to assure the quality of scientific journals. The DHSS is very grateful for the time and effort reviewers invest in this process. DHSS adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and strives to ensure that the review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Decisions to accept a manuscript for publication depending on the importance of investigated issue, originality, clarity, validity, and relevance of the work to the scope of the DHSS. Therefore, reviewers have a major role decision on whether to accept an article for publication.

General Notes

Reviews should be conducted fairly and objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. If the research reported in the manuscript is flawed, criticize the science, not the scientist. Personal criticism is likely to lead an author to ignore useful comments, making your review less useful to your field. Criticisms should be objective, not merely differences of opinion, and intended to help the author improve his or her paper.
You should decline to review manuscripts in which you have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
If your previous or present connection with the author(s) or an author’s institution might be construed as creating a conflict of interest, but no actual conflict exists, please include this issue in your confidential comments to the editor. If in doubt, please contact the Editor who requested the review before accepting.
Respect the confidentiality of the manuscript, which is sent to you in confidence. You should not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in your own work. If you feel a colleague is more qualified than you to review the paper, do not pass the manuscript on to that person without first requesting permission to do so from the editor. Your review and your recommendation should also be considered confidential.
If you choose to remain anonymous, ensure that you avoid comments to the authors that might serve as clues to your identity.

Comments to Editor

Your Comments to the Editor will be submitted to the Managing Editor and the Editor-in-Chief only. These should include any possible conflicts of interest. Comments and constructive criticism of the manuscript should be placed in the Comments to the Author.

Comments to the Author(s)

Your Comments to the Author(s) will be submitted to the Managing Editor and the Editor-in-Chief. They are also communicated to the author(s) and to the other anonymous reviewers of the manuscript once the editor has made a decision.
Comments should be constructive and designed to enhance the manuscript. You should consider yourself the authors’ mentor. Make your comments as complete and detailed as possible. Express your views clearly with supporting arguments and references as necessary. Include clear opinions about the strengths, weaknesses and relevance of the manuscript, its originality and its importance to the field. Specific comments that cite line numbers are most helpful. If you feel unqualified to address certain aspects of the manuscript, please include a statement to identify these areas.

Begin by identifying the major contributions of the paper. What are its major strengths and weaknesses, and its suitability for publication? Please include both general and specific comments bearing on these questions and emphasize your most significant points.
Support your general comments, positive or negative, with specific evidence.
If you wish to make comments directly on the manuscript pdf using the Note tool, you may do so. However, we do not expect you to copy-edit the manuscript. If you do annotate the pdf, please also include a summary of your general comments. You may also upload other documents (e.g. your review as a document, useful references). The journal editorial assistant will remove your identity from the properties of these documents to maintain your anonymity.

Points to consider in your review include:

Is the topic of the manuscript appropriate for the DHSS? Is the information of significant interest to the broad readership of the DHSS?
Do the title, abstract, keywords, introduction, and conclusions accurately and consistently reflect the major point(s) of the paper?
Is the writing concise, easy to follow, and interesting, without repetition?
Is the aim clearly stated?
Are the methods appropriate, scientifically sound, current, and described clearly enough that the work could be repeated by someone else?
Is the research ethical and have the appropriate approvals/consent been obtained?
Are appropriate statistical/econometric analyses used? Are they sufficiently justified and explained? Are statements of significance justified?
When results are stated in the text of the paper, are they supported by data? Can you verify them easily by examining tables and figures? Are any of the results counterintuitive?
Are all tables and figures necessary, clearly labeled, well designed, and readily interpretable? Is the information in the tables and figures redundant? Is it repeated in the text?
Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?
Are the references cited the most appropriate to support the manuscript? Are citations provided for all assertions of fact not supported by the data in this paper? Are any key citations missing?
Consider the length of the manuscript, relative to the content. Should any portions of the paper be expanded, condensed, combined, or deleted? (Please be specific in your advice, and don’t simply advise overall shortening by x%).
Does the manuscript comply with the Instructions for Authors?

Please also comment on any possible research or publication misconduct, such as:

Does this manuscript report data or conclusions already publish or in the press? If so, please provide details.
Has the author plagiarised another publication?
Is there any indication that the data have been fabricated or inappropriately manipulated?
Have the authors declared all relevant competing interests?

Publication Schedule

Frequency and regularity are the main requirements that directly influence the credibility of the journals. In this connection, the Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) publication schedule comprises one (1) volume with two (2) issues each year on a regular basis with the following descriptions:

January to June Issue
July to December Issue

Author(s) Contribution

The author’(s) contribution statement must be contained as a separate statement while publishing their articles in Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS). The acknowledgments must contain all those who have substantially contributed to the research. Upon submission of a manuscript, all authors’ (principal, corresponding & co-authors) must provide their full names, e-mail addresses, contact numbers, and institutional affiliations (first page only). Besides, providing author(s)’ ORCID identifiers are encouraged.

Ownership of the Published Articles

By default, all content published in DHSS is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license permits users to use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the article provided that the authors are the original creators and that the reuse is restricted to non-commercial purposes, i.e., is attributed to research or educational use

Ethics Statement

Publication Ethics and Mal-Practice Statement (PEMS)

The Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is committed to the academic community and the lay world in ensuring ethics in publication and the quality of articles in publication. Plagiarism is strictly condemned, and papers found to be plagiarized will be removed or not published in the DHSS. While signing the publication agreement the author(s) have to warrant that the article and associated materials are original, and it does not infringe the copyright of anyone. Also, the authors must warrant that there was a full consensus of all the authors, and it was neither submitted nor published previously. We state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors of the Committee on Publication Ethics. The Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) has adopted and applies the ethical rules for publication in accordance with the guidelines of the COPE (Publication Ethics Committee) (available at http://publicationethics.org/).

Author(s) Guidelines (Authors Ethics)

A full-length article should be around 7000 words, but should not exceed 7000 words, including references.
A Focus essay—which we define as an essay written on an event, concept, or theory of enduring significance and for providing an initial thesis or creating understanding–should be around 4,000 words. Both types of articles will go through the similar double-blind peer review process.
Author(s) should present an accurate account of the research performed and offer an objective discussion of its significance.
DHSS follows APA Style for referencing and citation.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made some significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the submitted study.
The author(s) are required to submit a Similarity Index Report by using the service of Turnitin.org. It is required to ensure the originality of the work.
The manuscript should offer new, original insights or interpretations that have not been published before or are not under consideration for publication in any other journal.
Author(s) should declare all funding sources and any actual or potential conflicts including any financial, personal, or other relationships with other people and organizations.
Author(s) is required to sign an agreement on the originality of work and its copyrights with the journal.

Duties of Reviewers (Reviewers Ethics)

Double-blind peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscript received for review is treated as a confidential document.
Double-blind peer reviews are conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Publisher (Publisher Ethics)

In cases of alleged or proven misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining its own digital archive.
If an inaccuracy, misleading text, or wrong explanations are found in the published article, it must be corrected promptly.
All complaints will be seriously investigated by the editor regardless of who files the complaint.

Duties of Editor (Editor Ethics)

Editors will examine all the submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit: significance, timeliness, relevance, originality, and clarity. They would not take into account the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious beliefs or institutional affiliation. The editors will guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct when needed.
Editors and staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as necessary.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in any editor’s own research. The editors will ensure a fair and appropriate double-blind peer- review process: HEC Pakistan requires two international and one national review, which will be followed.
Submissions from authors with which the editors have any conflict of interest will be assessed by a member of the Editorial Board. Submissions by members of the Editorial Board will be assigned to an Associate or Guest Editor to ensure a fair and appropriate process. The editors will require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo double-blind peer-review by at least two international reviewers and one national reviewer (Pakistan) as required by HEC Pakistan. The reviewers must be experts in the field. The Editor is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor confers with associate editors and/or reviewers in making this decision.

Guest Editors’ Ethics

Guest editors are responsible for defining the subject matter and role of every article in a thematic issue.
Providing clear guidelines to authors regarding the topic and boundaries of their contributions and the overall design of the issue.
Ensuring, in collaboration with the executive editorial board, that appropriate reviewers are selected for all the articles (whether they have been commissioned or submitted because of a call for papers).
Establishing a timeline for draft paper submission, peer review, revision, and final paper submission with the executive editorial board, and ensuring that all deadlines are met.

Funding Statement

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) requires authors to specify any sources of funding (institutional, private, and corporate financial support) for the work reported in their paper. This information, in the form of the name of the funding organisation/s and the grant number or should be included at the end of the article under the heading “Funding” and provided at the time of submitting the paper. If there was no funding, the following wording should be used: “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors”. This information will be included in the published article.

Manuscript Template

Will be developed soon

Publication Fee

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) currently does not charge any publication fee like Article Processing Charges (APC) for manuscript submission, processing, or publication. We believe in promoting open access to scientific research without imposing financial barriers on authors.

Polices

Peer Review Policy

DHSS strictly follows its policy and procedure of editorial and peer review through which it is ensured that:

the content of the article is relevant to the aim/scope of DHSS.
the article has produced an innovative and quality research.
the format and layout of DHSS are followed; and
the style, grammar and composition of language is correct.

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) employs a double-blind peer review process for all submitted manuscripts, meaning that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from each other throughout the review process. A more in-depth description of DHSS peer review policy is provided below:

Submission of Paper
The corresponding author can submit research work for potential publication in Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) via the Online Journal System (OJS).

Editorial Office Assessment
The DHSS editorial office checks the submitted manuscripts’ format and composition in line with the author’s guidelines and the journal’s scope. This stage of scrutiny does not assess the quality of research.

Chief Editor’s Appraisal
The chief editor apprises whether the research work is original, has potential for novelty, and is appropriately aligned with the journal’s scope. If the manuscript does fulfil the aforementioned criteria, it is liable to rejection at this stage without being considered for any further review.

Chief Editor’s Assignment to an Associate Editor
After appraising the manuscript, the chief editor assigns the task of further appraisal to associate editors through desk review/editing.

Desk Review
The associate editor scrutinizes the manuscript in light of the journal’s scope and content requirements and recommends potential improvements and incorporation into the manuscript.

Communicating Suggestions to Authors
The associate editor’s desk review suggestions for potential revisions and improvements of the manuscript are shared with authors for incorporation. After these necessary incorporations, the manuscript is forwarded to the experts’ review phase.

Invitation to Reviewers
The associate editor invites potential reviewers within specialized fields for manuscript review. The manuscript is then sent out to the reviewers based on their responses, with a request to complete the review within a maximum of 2 to 4 weeks. As per the journal’s policy, the manuscript is sent to two reviewers (Blind review).

Review Conducted
The potential and expert reviewers spare ample time to read the manuscript, reflected in how they highlight both strengths and weaknesses of the research work. If they find major issues in the manuscript, reviewers have the freedom either to completely reject it or suggest major revisions. The reviewers submit their reviews to the journal’s editorial team with recommendations to accept (with/without minor or major revisions) or reject.

Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The journal’s editorial team considers and scrutinizes all the reviewers’ comments and decisions before reaching a final decision. In case of wider differences in reviewers’ comments, the editor might invite an additional reviewer (if deemed appropriate) to get further opinions before making the final decision.

Decision Communication
The editor communicates the decision with authors via email containing relevant reviewer’s comments and advises the authors to incorporate all the changes as per the reviewers’ suggestions.

Final Decision
The editorial team will look through the resubmitted manuscript to ensure that the author(s) have revised the manuscript in response to the reviewers’ comments. At this final decision stage, the author(s) may be required to make further revisions, or the manuscript might be rejected if the author(s) did not adequately carry out the revisions suggested by the reviewers.

Copyediting, Layout Editing, and Proofreading Stage
Once the manuscript is accepted by the editorial team, it will undergo copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading processes to ensure the linguistic quality of the manuscript. After the editing stage is finished, authors are requested to double-check the PDF file of the final version before online publication.

Appeals against Editorial Decisions
In case an author would like to challenge an editorial decision, he or she should contact the Editor-In-Chief of the journal. Upon receipt of the appeal, the Editor-In-Chief will review the manuscript and peer reviewers’ comments, and then make a decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of the manuscript. If necessary, the Editor-In-Chief may choose to send the manuscript to new referees for peer review. The decision of the Editor-In-Chief is final in such cases. All submitted complaints will be acknowledged within two working days.

Archiving and Repository Policy

DHSS digital archiving policy guarantees that published scholarly content remains readily available to the academic community in the face of accidental data loss in our archival records. This is made possible through the robust systems integrated into the OJS:

PKP Preservation Network (PN)

The PKP Preservation Network (PN) is a valuable service of the PKP community. It offers free preservation services for any journal managed and operated through the Open Journal System (OJS). The PKP PN plugin for OJS 3 is easily accessible in the plugin gallery, and it's been activated for DHSS, ensuring that the scholarly content is part of this comprehensive preservation network.

Self-archiving (Repository Policy)

At DHSS, we encourage authors to take ownership of their work. Authors can deposit all versions of their manuscripts, including pre-prints, author's submitted manuscripts, accepted manuscripts, and published articles (version of record), in an institutional or subject repository with no embargo. This flexible self-archiving policy ensures the broadest possible dissemination of the published research.

Plagiarism Policy

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is open-access, and refereed journal, which is published biannual. Currently, DHSS is following the HEC (Pakistan) policies regarding Turnitin Originality Report and Plagiarism. As per the HEC policy, plagiarism is not accepted and zero tolerance policy on Plagiarism issue. DHSS aims for original scripts with an overall similarity index of less than or equal to 19% and individual source 3% or less in the Turnitin Originality Report.
Authors are advised to avoid using words, graphs, figures, and or ideas of others without proper attribution. All sources, therefore, must be cited at the places where they have been referred to, limited reuse of wording is highly desirable, and proper attribution is required when quoted in the text. While submitting their work to this journal, declaration of the originality of work and whenever and wherever used in their work, proper citation to previous publication is mandatory for authors. In case of the detection of plagiarism and unoriginality during the peer review process, the manuscript is liable to rejection. In case of post publication plagiarism detection, the publisher reserves the right to issue either directions correction or retract the manuscript.

Open Access Policy

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is an Open Access journal and makes its contents available to users without any cost. No prior approval from the publisher of this journal is required if users wish to read, use, and download its contents for lawful and authorized purposes. However, it is mandatory for users to quote the materials with references when used in citations, as duly prescribed under predetermined terms and conditions specified in guidelines, code of conduct, and CC by NC. The authors are authorized of the copyright for their work and can use the same for legal purposes without any prior permission from the journal.

Correction Policy

Well-defined and precise knowledge sharing is the chief objective of DHSS and facilitates the academic community via information distribution. Furthermore, to serve the academic community, Research Mosaic has a strong faith in intelligibility through delivering correct information and maintaining all essential record. Journal explains this procedure from initial submission till final stage and the publications are available in diverse volumes and issues. Once the manuscript is published, editorial team display the volume and issues of the journal at the journal website, which can be easily explored, read, downloaded, and shared through an open access policy.

DHSS offers prospects to authors for getting their manuscripts proofread beforehand the availability of the online version, which ensures the accuracy of the contents. Since issuing corrigenda and errata increases the likelihood that the journal content readers and the users would have difficulties, the contents are, therefore, made error-free to the possible extent. Further, in this connection, even after a manuscript is published, partial corrections might be made at the decision of the editorial team of DHSS. Therefore, to improve the quality of published research work, the editorial team might opt for minor alterations and corrections at any stage as they are vital to ascertain the integrity of the published materials to ensure the quality.

The DHSS takes serious note of the issues related to copyright infringement, plagiarism, and violation of other ethical codes in the publication process. In this respect, sometimes, whenever any violation of publication ethics and copyright infringement is exposed, the journal reserves the right to proceed with appropriate and necessary actions to correct the record on a priority basis no matter whether the authors present either intentionally or unintentionally and communicate to the journal’s editorial team. Consequently, the materials that this journal has already published, become the journal’s intellectual property and hold the right of replacing the accurate materials in the best interest of the journal and the academic community.

Conflict of Interest Policy

All forms of financial support are given due acknowledgment in the contribution.
Any commercial or financial involvement that might present a conflict of interest related to the contribution is recorded during submission.
Any potential conflict of interest shall be discussed with the Editor to decide whether its information will be disclosed in the manuscript.
The author(s) did not sign any agreement with any sponsor of the research submitted to the journal that prevents the author(s) from publishing both positive and negative results or that forbids the author(s) from publishing the research without prior approval of the sponsor.
The author(s) have checked the manuscript submission guidelines for a Declaration of Conflicting Interests requirement and have complied with specified requirements.

Complaint and Misconduct Policy

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) welcomes complaints by considering them as an opportunity for improvement and aims to respond to them quickly and constructively.

What a Complaint is?

Our comprehension of a complaint is as follows:

The complainant defines his or her expression of unhappiness as a complaint.
We infer that the complainant is not simply disagreeing with a decision we have made or something we have published but thinks that there has been a failure of process—for example, an unacceptably long delay or a rude response—or a severe misjudgement.
The complaint must be about something that is within the responsibility of DHSS’ editorial division i.e. content or process.

Complaint Making Process

All complaints will be acknowledged.
Complaints should be made either by sending an email to farhatullah@kust.edu.pk.
Whenever possible complaints will be dealt with by the editorial team member to whom they are made. If that person cannot deal with the complaint, he or she will refer it to the editor-in-chief.
If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the editor-in-chief, whose decision is final.
If possible, a definitive response will be made within two weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within two weeks. Interim responses will be provided until the complaint is finally resolved.

The Process to Deal with Issues of Misconduct

Dialogues in Humanities and Social Sciences (DHSS) is of the opinion that institutions and journals should promote best practices among researchers, authors, reviewers, and editors.
To maintain integrity and deal with misconduct allegations, the editor can be contacted at farhatullah@kust.edu.pk. The editor is responsible for investigating cases of misconduct by researchers and for finding misconduct that could affect the reliability or attribution of published work (e.g. fabrication or plagiarism).
Where possible, the evidence could be provided to support allegations of misconduct or questionable practices (e.g. copies of overlapping publications, evidence of plagiarism). Retractions or corrections are issued when provided with findings of misconduct arising from appropriate investigations.
Hence, it is advised that the authors and reviewers should read the guidelines provided on the journal’s website and must be remained strictly adhere to all aspects of publication ethics.

Licensing Policy

Articles in DHSS are Open-Access content published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This license permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work and source are properly cited.

Users may use, reproduce, disseminate, or display the article(s) provided that the author(s) are attributed as the original creators. Authors are encouraged to familiarise themselves with the various Creative Commons licenses.

Readers are advised to consult the licensing information embedded in each published work to ensure they are familiar with the applicable terms of use.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.

Policy Document

Information

Make a Submission