The IJSI employs a model of double-sided anonymized peer review for the manuscript evaluation process. In this model, there is no way for authors and reviewers of a work to identify one another.

A manuscript must follow the journal's aims, scope, and writing guidelines to be considered for peer review. Furthermore, it requires passing a similarity scan successfully. We use well-known similarity scanning programs to examine the works. No evaluation will be given to manuscripts with a higher than 15% similarity level. Such articles will be returned to the corresponding author.

The editor, working with an editorial board member who also serves as a field editor for the relevant article theme, is in charge of completing the initial submission assessment. When a manuscript meets the criteria for peer review, it is sent to two reviewers for evaluation. Based on the reports provided by the reviewers, the decision is made to publish, revise, or reject.  If there is a conflict between two reviewers' decisions at the end of the first round of the peer review process, the editor can decide or seek a third reviewer's opinion. The decision is communicated to the corresponding author without delay. The author(s) are given 25 days for a major revision and 15 days for a minor revision when the decision is made.