Presentation

Does the manuscript present a coherent, academically grounded, and relevant argument? Are the ideas clearly, logically, and systematically organized across the manuscript?

Writing Quality

Does the title accurately represent the manuscript? Is the writing concise, precise, academically appropriate, grammatically correct, and understandable to readers from different disciplinary backgrounds?

Length and Organization

Which parts of the manuscript should be expanded, removed, condensed, summarized, reorganized, or combined to improve clarity, methodological rigor, interdisciplinary relevance, and scholarly contribution?

Title

Is the title concise, informative, and representative of the study’s principal topic, variables, participants, context, approach, or main finding? Does it avoid unnecessary expressions, implicit terms, and unexplained abbreviations?

Abstract

Does the abstract clearly include:

• The background and aim or purpose of the study;
• The research design, participants or data sources, setting, instruments, procedures, and analytical techniques;
• The principal results or findings, including relevant statistical or qualitative evidence where applicable; and
• The main conclusion, scholarly contribution, and practical or interdisciplinary implications?

Introduction

Does the introduction clearly describe:

• The background and academic, practical, social, scientific, or educational significance of the study;
• The state of the art and relevant previous research from the principal discipline and related fields;
• The theoretical, empirical, methodological, practical, or interdisciplinary research gap;
• A clear statement of novelty or original contribution;
• The theoretical, conceptual, or interdisciplinary framework underpinning the study;
• The research questions and/or hypotheses, where relevant;
• The approach used to address the identified research problem; and
• The aim and specific objectives of the study?

Interdisciplinary Integration

• Does the manuscript clearly identify the disciplines, perspectives, theories, or methods being integrated?
• Is the integration meaningful and necessary for addressing the research problem rather than merely presenting multiple disciplines separately?
• Does the manuscript explain how each disciplinary perspective contributes to the research design, analysis, interpretation, or proposed solution?
• Are differences in concepts, terminology, assumptions, and evidence across disciplines appropriately addressed?
• Does the interdisciplinary approach generate insights or contributions that could not be achieved adequately through a single disciplinary perspective?

Method

• Is the research design appropriate to the research questions and described clearly enough to permit academic evaluation and replication?
• Does the section explain how the research was conducted rather than merely defining methodological concepts?
• Are the research context, participants, population, sample, sampling procedures, eligibility criteria, data sources, instruments, materials, procedures, and analytical techniques clearly reported?
• Are the operational definitions, indicators, measures, or analytical categories clearly explained?
• For quantitative studies, are the variables, sample-size considerations, instruments, validity, reliability, statistical assumptions, analytical techniques, effect sizes, confidence intervals, and validation procedures appropriately reported?
• For qualitative studies, are the participants, research setting, data-collection procedures, interview or observation protocols, coding and analysis techniques, credibility strategies, and researcher reflexivity clearly explained?
• For mixed-methods studies, are the rationale, quantitative and qualitative components, sequence, priority, integration procedures, and interpretation of combined findings clearly described?
• For experimental or applied studies, are the research design, materials, intervention, comparison conditions, duration, procedures, measurements, implementation fidelity, and evaluation criteria sufficiently reported?
• For technological or computational studies, are the data sources, system design, algorithms, software, evaluation metrics, validation procedures, and reproducibility considerations adequately explained?
• For systematic or scoping reviews, are the databases, search strategies, keywords, eligibility criteria, screening procedures, quality assessment, and evidence-synthesis methods transparently reported?
• Are ethical approval, informed consent, confidentiality, data protection, participant safety, conflicts of interest, and institutional permission reported where applicable?

Results and Discussion

• Are the results presented as systematically processed and analyzed evidence?
• Are tables and figures relevant, readable, correctly numbered, and supported by clear titles, captions, units, sources, and explanations?
• Are descriptive statistics, statistical tests, effect sizes, confidence intervals, qualitative themes, computational metrics, or other relevant findings reported accurately and completely?
• Do the results directly address the research questions, hypotheses, or objectives stated in the Introduction?
• Are the findings interpreted analytically rather than merely restated?
• Are the findings critically compared with relevant studies from the principal discipline and related fields?
• Does the discussion explain agreements, differences, unexpected findings, and possible theoretical, scientific, technological, educational, social, cultural, economic, environmental, or contextual mechanisms?
• Does the manuscript explain its theoretical, methodological, practical, educational, technological, social, institutional, or policy implications where relevant?
• Does the study demonstrate a meaningful interdisciplinary contribution or show how its findings can be applied across disciplinary or practical contexts?
• Are alternative interpretations of the findings considered where appropriate?
• Are the study limitations and potential threats to validity, credibility, transferability, or generalizability acknowledged clearly?
• Are meaningful directions for future research, interdisciplinary collaboration, or practical application provided?

Conclusion

Does the conclusion:

• Directly answer the research objectives, questions, or hypotheses;
• Synthesize the principal findings without merely repeating the Results section;
• State the study’s disciplinary and/or interdisciplinary contributions;
• Provide realistic recommendations for researchers, students, educators, practitioners, institutions, communities, industries, or policymakers where appropriate;
• Avoid making claims that extend beyond the research design, data, participants, context, or available evidence; and
• Appear as a coherent paragraph rather than bullet points or numbering?

Student Research Quality

• Does the manuscript demonstrate independent inquiry, critical thinking, and an appropriate understanding of the research problem?
• Is the research question sufficiently focused, relevant, and feasible?
• Does the study move beyond a classroom assignment by providing a clear scholarly, practical, or interdisciplinary contribution?
• Are the methods, evidence, interpretations, and conclusions presented with adequate academic rigor?
• Does the manuscript acknowledge the boundaries of the study and avoid unsupported claims?

Scope Fit and Contribution to JSIIR

Does the manuscript clearly align with the scope of the Journal of Student Inquiry and Interdisciplinary Research (JSIIR)? The journal welcomes student-led, student-collaborative, and emerging-scholar research that demonstrates systematic inquiry, academic rigor, critical thinking, creativity, and meaningful engagement with disciplinary or interdisciplinary research problems.

The journal welcomes original research, review articles, conceptual studies, case studies, applied projects, and interdisciplinary investigations across education, social sciences, humanities, economics, management, business, law, health, natural sciences, mathematics, engineering, computer science, digital technology, environmental studies, arts, culture, and other related fields.

Does the manuscript provide a clear theoretical, empirical, methodological, practical, or interdisciplinary contribution relevant to JSIIR’s readership? Does it explain how the findings advance knowledge, connect perspectives across disciplines, address a real-world problem, improve professional or educational practice, or create opportunities for further student inquiry and scholarly collaboration?