SOCIOS stands as an interdisciplinary peer review platform for preprints in the Social Sciences. We publish a diverse range of English and German language preprints from disciplines such as sociology, political science, social and cultural anthropology, criminology, social policy, social psychology, population research, historical social research, labor market and occupational research as well as communication sciences. We value the interconnectivity of the disciplines and welcome contributions that bridge multiple areas of study. 

We welcome submissions that offer fresh insights, whether they emerge from traditional studies, innovative research designs, or novel analytical techniques. This includes exploratory studies, large-scale analyses, theory-driven inquiries, and methodological innovations. Recognizing the importance of robust and reproducible results, we particularly encourage the submission of replication studies, especially those that follow the registered report format.

We acknowledge the importance of all research outcomes, including single findings, null results, and negative findings. Such contributions are essential for a balanced scientific inquiry and are welcomed with equal enthusiasm.

We value the authenticity of academic contributions. That's why we require all contributors - authors, reviewers, and commenters - to register and sign in using their ORCiD. This step helps us reduce fraudulent activities and confirm true identities and affiliations. ORCID badges and iD numbers are displayed on article pages next to contributors’ names and included within the metadata. Our integration with ORCID ensures that any work published on our platform, including peer review reports, is automatically updated in the researcher’s ORCID record. This reduces repetitive data entry and increases the visibility of your contributions.

Every submission to SOCIOS undergoes an initial screening to ensure it meets our publication standards and conforms to the specific article guidelines. We also check the completeness of author disclosure statements on potential conflicts of interest, sources of funding, informed consent, ethics approval, data availability, and study pre-registration. If your submission passes the screening, it will be posted on SOCIOS within a few working days. Posters and slides are published after verifying their scope and accuracy of metadata.

Peer review begins once an article is publicly available. We embrace a community-based approach that allows for both invited and spontaneous contributions.

On Invitation: Authors can recommend potential reviewers who meet our criteria (tools like JANE can help find reviewers with the right expertise). Our editorial team may also suggest additional qualified reviewers as needed. We aim to gather a minimum of three peer review reports.

Spontaneous: Registered researchers on our platform with the necessary qualifications can independently choose to review articles.

Immediately on publication, and while reviewers are assessing the work, the article is labelled as AWAITING PEER REVIEW.

When a peer review report is received the editorial team will ensure it meets the above guidelines and code of conduct. Reviewers may be contacted at this stage to clarify any issues. Once these checks are complete, reports are published alongside the article and the manuscript's status is updated to PEER REVIEWED.

The peer review process for a given version of a preprint concludes after receiving three peer review reports, after a revised version is published, or after an article is accepted for publication in a journal. 

Authors have the right to suspend the peer review process at their discretion. In such cases, SOCIOS may issue a statement on the article's page detailing the rationale behind the suspension and change the status to PEER REVIEW CLOSED. If a manuscript fails to attract any peer reviews within six months, or only one review after nine months, the peer review process will be terminated, and the status will also be changed to PEER REVIEW CLOSED.

Reviewers should meet the following criteria:

Verification is done through institutional email addresses, official profiles, or other suitable methods (e.g., Scopus, ORCID).

Reviewers who do not meet our reviewer criteria can co-review with a qualified principal reviewer. This mentorship helps train emerging scholars and ensures comprehensive assessments. The corresponding reviewer is the main point of contact for discussions between authors and reviewers. Co-reviewers must be acknowledged in the review report.

SOCIOS employs an open peer review model where the identities of authors, reviewers, and commenters are disclosed not only to each other but also to the broader readership. This openness fosters a more ethical and collaborative environment, encouraging honesty and constructive feedback. Authors can actively engage with reviewers by responding to their reports through our public commenting tool, facilitating a dynamic and ongoing dialogue.

Complete review reports, including the reviewer’s name, affiliation, and any competing interest statements, are published alongside the manuscript. Each of these reports is assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI), establishing a permanent and citable record of the peer review process.

Moreover, we encourage post-publication commenting to further academic discussions and enhance the scholarly discourse. This continual engagement ensures that research is rigorously vetted and continuously improved, benefiting the entire academic community.

To ensure consistency in peer review definitions and terminology, we follow the Standard Terminology for Peer Review (ANSI/NISO Z39.106-2023) to summarize our peer review process:

• Identity transparency: all identities visible
• Reviewer interacts with: other reviewers, authors, moderators
• Review information published: submitted manuscript, review reports, reviewer identities
• Post publication commenting: open

Peer review reports should be clear and well-written, using concise language to ensure that feedback is easily understood. Each review should provide a brief overview of the article, highlighting its main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. This summary should clearly outline the article’s content and significance. Reviewers are expected to identify both significant and minor issues within the article and offer constructive advice for improvement. They should highlight areas needing clarification, expansion, or refinement, and provide specific suggestions for addressing any issues. Additionally, reviewers must give an overall recommendation, providing clear and specific reasons for their assessment.

For German preprints, the language of peer review reports can be either German or English. However, for English articles, the reports must be written in English.

Peer review reports must be submitted in PDF format. Each report must include the reviewer’s full name, affiliation, and competing interest statement. If no conflicts of interest exist, this should be explicitly stated. The report is published under a perpetual, non-exclusive Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-ND 4.0) license.

• Only accept assignments if you have the relevant expertise.
• Judge all manuscripts solely on their academic merit.
• Be impartial and free from bias.
• Offer honest and constructive feedback aimed at improving the quality of the manuscript.
• Justify recommendations with specific examples and references.
• Communicate clearly and respectfully.
• Ensure thorough and consistent evaluations.
• Report any potential ethical issues to SOCIOS editorial staff.
• Inform the editorial team if you discover significant errors post-review.
• Avoid using manuscript content with generative AI technologies.

Reviewers are advised to familiarize themselves with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. If the editorial team finds that a review does not adhere to the standards above, they will contact the reviewer before publishing the peer review report.

Authors play a crucial role in the peer review process by actively engaging with the feedback from reviewers and commenters. It’s their responsibility to carefully examine critiques and recommendations, consider their validity, and respond politely and professionally, even if they disagree with certain comments. Direct contact with reviewers about their reviews is discouraged to preserve the integrity and impartiality of the review process. Instead, all communications should be channeled through SOCIOS to ensure transparency and fairness.

Authors are encouraged to submit revised versions after considering reviewers' comments or making minor updates that impact the article’s findings. Each revision is treated as a new version of the article, with all versions linked and independently citable. A summary of changes will be displayed at the start of each new version for quick reference. Additionally, all versions will be automatically added to the author's ORCID record.

When a revised article is submitted, previous reviewers are invited to re-review the updated manuscript. This step is especially important for reviewers who initially suggested substantial changes, as their follow-up evaluations are critical in determining whether the revisions have improved the work.

Beyond article peer review, SOCIOS offers a commenting tool for all types of publications. Our commenting system is designed to facilitate a swift and dynamic exchange of feedback and ideas on articles, posters, and slides. To ensure scholarly discussion, comments are generally welcomed from readers with a formal affiliation to a research institution or verifiable expertise in the relevant field.

We invite comments that focus exclusively on the scholarly content presented. All Comments must be written in good English. Contributions should aim to enrich the discussion, highlight significant elements, and provide constructive feedback and insightful criticism.

Commenters must use a valid ORCiD and provide their full name and affiliation with each comment. Commenters are also required to declare any competing interests.

Comments submitted to our platform will be published in real-time. This ensures that feedback, questions, and discussions can occur without delay, fostering an environment of immediate scholarly exchange and collaboration. If readers notice a comment displaying disruptive behavior, they are encouraged to flag the comment for review. Our editorial team will assess the situation and take appropriate action. The commenter's identity will remain visible, but the text of the comment may be removed if it violates our guidelines. We reserve the right to remove any comments deemed inappropriate without prior notice if they are found to breach our code of conduct. 

Preprints and peer review reports submitted to SOCIOS gain a permanent digital presence through indexing by services such as DataCite. Once posted, preprints cannot be altered or withdrawn for reasons such as submission to a journal. Authors wishing to revise, update, or correct their work can do so by publishing new versions of the preprint. Each new version will:

• Be documented in the preprint's history, clearly indicating the version number and the date of publication.
• Receive a unique DOI that maintains a connection to the original preprint and its earlier versions.

While all versions remain publicly accessible and can be cited on their own, the most recent version is presented by default on the SOCIOS platform.

Articles are published under a Creatice Commons (CC BY 4.0) license, which allows the author or their institution to retain copyright and permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided appropriate credit is given. Different CC licenses may apply to posters and slides. Peer review reports published with an article are available under the CC BY-NC-ND license, which allows copying and distribution in unadapted form for noncommercial purposes, as long as attribution is given to the creator.

SOCIOS ensures that submissions are indexed in relevant services such as Google Scholar and BASE.

Articles:

Author(s) (date). Article title [version number]. SOCIOS. doi

Posters and Slides:

Author(s) (date). Poster title. SOCIOS. doi

Author(s) (date). Slides title. SOCIOS. doi

Peer Review Reports:

Reviewer(s) (Date). Review of: Article title [version number]. SOCIOS. doi