The Study of the financial effects of divorce on Iran’s Law
Mohammad Reza Marandi, Mojtaba Rahmani
Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (JSSHR) endeavors to select and publish high-quality articles that can freely and accessibly contribute to the advancement of our knowledge in these fields. To reach this goal, we follow the blind peer review process carefully and fairly, and with respect to copyright, provide articles in the form of open access to readers. The whole process of publishing articles (from submitting to publishing the final version) is free and no money is received from the authors to further develop science and get closer to the knowledge of experts. Certainly, this opportunity can be an effective step in a better understanding of Social Science and Humanities in society.
More Cited Article:
Mohammad Reza Marandi, Hafez Hasanzadeh
Zabih-Alah Khansha, Samad Tavakolie Zanghir
Esrafil Amani Isalu, Alireza Lotfi
JSSHR provides quantitative and qualitative articles with world standard methods that have scientific and practical contributions. Obviously, articles must ultimately have a problem-solving approach to human and societal conditions and increase our understanding of social complexities. Below, the general areas of the journal are shown.
Social Work, Social Psychology, Women’s Studies, Psychology, Political Science, Cultural Studies, School Counseling, Family Counseling, Education, Social History, Learning Studies, International Relations, Social Embeddedness, Humanities, Human Geography, Exceptional Children Studies, Public Administration.
Editor-in-chief: Md. Mamun Habib
School of Business, Independent University, Bangladesh
Editor: Patrick Velte
Institute of Banking, Finance and Accounting, Leuphana University Lueneburg, Germany
Section Editors: Paolo Pietro Biancone
School of Business, Independent University, Bangladesh
Section Editor: Mário José Batista Franco
Department of Educational and Business, University of Beira Interior, PORTUGAL Street: Estrada do Sineiro.
Section Editor: Helena Maria Baptista Alves
Department of Educational ,Business and Economics, Estrada do Sineiro,6200 Covilhã , University of Beira Interior, Portugal
Section Editor: Firouzeh Sepehrian
Department of psychology,Urmia University, Education & Psychology Faculty,Urmia, IRAN
Section Editor: Abbas Gholtash
Associate Professor, Department of Educational Sciences, Marvdasht Branch, IAU, Marvdasht , Iran
Section Editor: Sónia Bentes
Department of Finance of ISCAL – Lisbon Institute of Management and Accounting
Section Editor: Florin Negoescu
Department of machine manufacturing technology & Industrial management faculty of machine manufacturing & Industrial management. “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University, Iaşi.
Editor: Nastaran Haji Heydari
Department of Management School of Management University of Tehran IRAN
Editor: Hossein Jenaabadi
Department of Psychology Education, Faculty of Humanities, Sistan and Baluchestan zahedan,IRAN
Editor: Meisam Sabz Ali zade
Master of Architecture, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Ardab
Editor: Tohid Fathipoor
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences(SBMU), Valanjak, Tehran, Iran.
Editor: Azita Aghazadeh
Department of Administration Educational, Ardabil Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ardabil, Iran
Editor: Zhanna V.Chevychalova
Associate Professor of the Department of International Law, Yaroslav Mudry National Law
Editor: Catalina García García
Department of Quantitative Methods in Economics and Enterprises, Faculty of Economics,
University of Granada, SPAIN
the Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research (JSSHR) strives to be able to select and publish high standard articles in the fields of social science and humanities through a peer-review process and open access strategy. To achieve this goal, the reviewing process must be fair, accurate, and the same for everyone. Certainly, mutual trust is the result of justice in reviewing and accuracy in work. Developing clear ethical principles that can be effective for potential issues between authors, reviewers, and editors will increase the journal’s credibility and reliability in the future. For this reason, effective ethical principles are drawn for the Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research that meet the needs of authors when submitting a manuscript, peer reviewers, and editors to prepare and publish it. All JSSHR’s authors, reviewers, and editors are encouraged to read codes of ethics and contact the Editor-in-Chief, Manouchehr Jofreh, at email@example.com, if they have any questions or concerns. These guidelines apply to the Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research from October 6, 2020, and maybe revised at any time by the Editor-in-Chief.
Ethical principles for authors
Plagiarism: All the manuscripts submitted to the journal must be free from any form of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism of research. Plagiarism takes many forms, including being inspired by other authors’ articles without mentioning their names, copying original parts of other studies, and exploiting even research results proven by others. Authors are expected to cite others’ articles and ideas once they use them, even if they have not quoted them literally. These principles can be also applied to published and unpublished articles as well as those submitted electronically to authors. Plagiarism in all its forms is a morally unacceptable act. It is worth mentioning, the iThenticate app is exercised to check plagiarism in the manuscripts submitted to this journal.
Self-Plagiarism: Self-plagiarism is considered as an unethical act in publishing articles. This style of plagiarism occurs in two ways. First, authors double back to a part of their previous writings using similar and close paragraphs and sentences that they have published in the past and repeat them in their subsequent articles without references or even acknowledgments. Second, authors submit several articles for consideration, with minor variations from each other, simultaneously to different journals without any references.
If authors make use of the same authors’ phrases or sentences in their work, it is necessary to indicate them with quotation marks (“Abcdef”) and to cite page numbers accurately. Authors in the direct quotation should not change the structure of the sentences and should exactly cite the same things.
If plagiarism is proven by browsers or editorial boards and in serious cases of plagiarism (such as copying paragraphs from other sources without any citations), the article will be desk rejected from the journal and authors are banned from submitting further manuscripts for a certain period of time. In the case of minor plagiarism (such as a duplicate paragraphs in the research method section), authors are asked to explain them.
Conflict of Interest: If authors have any interest in the research or have fulfilled it with organizational affiliation and any commercial, political, financial, or academic benefits, it should be removed at the time of submitting the article, since it leads to errors in the review process. However, in the last part of the article, authors are obliged to mention any benefits that the research has received, such as financial/intellectual or any other support, once the article is accepted by reviewers and the chief-in-editor e-mail is received.
Blind Peer Review: Authors are unaware of reviewers’ names, and the journal provides articles to reviewers anonymously. Authors should not communicate with reviewers apart from the conditions for submitting the article, and they should not also submit the manuscript on their own or directly to reviewers.
Accuracy: Authors are required to fully describe their entire research process and to provide a final discussion of the importance of their research. In any case, the research results must be entirely reported, whether hypotheses are confirmed or rejected. In each article, statistical hypothesis, theoretical support, research method, operational measurement of variables, and then findings and their interpretations should be totally disclosed.
If authors themselves are aware of significant errors in their research process, they should inform the journal immediately and reviewers should become aware of this issue in the shortest possible time.
Besides, all references in the main body of the article should be cited in bibliography sources perfectly and adapted to the journal standards.
Author Contributions: All authors named in the manuscript should play a significant role in the research process and share their responsibilities for the results. Only authors in charge of the research results can be named. Otherwise, they can be appreciated at the end of the article as contributors.
Corresponding Author: The person introduced as the corresponding author should make sure that the e-mail address inserted is correct because all correspondences and processes will be sent to the corresponding author during the reviews and after the publication of the article.
Duties of the corresponding author:
- Check and mention the e-mail address of authors and ensure their correctness.
- Check and mention the full postal address of the authors.
- Check and mention phone and fax numbers.
- Make sure to load all images used in the article along with their descriptions.
- Ensure that all tables and footnotes are loaded.
- Check for correct pronunciation and grammatical rules.
- Arrange references properly in the standard journal format.
- Confirm that all references at the end of the manuscript are used in the main body of the article.
Copyright: Authors should review their articles for copyright and possible flaws. Authors must also obtain permissions from co-authors to review the manuscript before submitting it. Likewise, authors should avoid using words that may cause tensions. They should not correspondingly exploit sexually explicit language that may be interpreted as immoral by a particular group.
Ethical principles for reviewers
The review process is a highly sensitive and critical activity that can increase the credibility of the journal and, at the same time, develop the related literature in that field. Reviewers may be selected from researchers and scholars submitting their manuscripts to the journal. The reviewing process is also expected to be fair and based solely on scientific criteria with regard to the following points at any time and for each manuscript.
Right of Refusal: Reviewers have the right not to accept the review of the manuscripts. When reviewers feel they have insufficient expertise in judging a manuscript, they should refuse it. As well, if there is a conflict of interest, they should do so. Sometimes, reviewers may collaborate in two journals, so they should inform the editor-in-chief if they have received the same article that has been previously judged.
Blind Peer Review: The Research Hub LLC’s journals have a blind peer review process. Reviewers’ identity is also unknown to authors, so reviewers should refuse checking manuscripts whose authors find out about their identity. Within this process, reviewers have the right to see authors’ profiles but not allowed to talk about their identities and reveal them.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should refuse reviewing manuscripts with a conflict of interest, such as organizational, personal, institutional, financial, and any factors that reflect authors’ relations with companies, organizations, and individuals. If reviewers perceive any conflict of interest, they should immediately inform the editor-in-chief.
Unbiasedness: Reviewers should not take personal or ethnic biases into account during their review process and simply evaluate all points of the manuscripts based on accurate and fair scientific criteria.
Confidentiality: Reviewers should note that the review process is confidential and should not be leaked outside. Only the journal editors have the right to consider reviews on the manuscripts. If reviewers observe any unprofessional behavior, they should discuss it with the editor-in-chief before their concerns are leaked out of the journal.
Accuracy: The Research Hub LLC’s journals expect reviewers to evaluate the manuscripts based on up-to-date and accurate standards and to provide convincing reasons for their comments. Reviewers should thus inform authors of their points in detail and sincerely try to improve the manuscripts. Besides, reviewers should be honest with what the editors think about publishing the manuscripts.
Timeliness: Reviewers must express their judgments within two weeks. If they cannot deliver reviews at this time, they must coordinate with the journal managing editor to either request more time or to select a new reviewer.
Ethical principles for editors
Independence: The journal editors must maintain their independence under all circumstances and remain impartial in terms of deciding to reject or accept the manuscripts. Unquestionably, editors make these decisions in consultation with reviewers. However, in the case of the manuscripts that are inconsistent with the journal’s missions or inappropriate ones, editors have the right to reject them without any reviews.
Unbiasedness: Authors expect editors to review the manuscripts in a confidential, unbiased, and fair manner. The criterion for editors’ judgments is only scientific, and they should refrain from any biases in this way. Knowing authors’ identities should not lead to biases against them, and they should not use discriminatory directions in their correspondences.
Conflict of Interest: The editor-in-chief cannot publish their own articles in their journals during their career. About the publication of the articles in other journals under the Research Hub LLC, they are submitted completely blind. Editor-in-chief and deputy editors should thus have no conflict of interest, whether individual, organizational, institutional, or financial ones, with authors.
Blind Peer Review: The Research Hub LLC journals have a blind peer review process. However, guest editors may sometimes write introductory articles for specific issues, which should be stated in the article.
Confidentiality: Any information about authors’ articles should not be leaked by the editor-in-chief and other staff of the journal. In the blind peer review process, the editor-in-chief must be also careful about the confidentiality of reviewers’ identities and decide the fate of the article immediately if their names are revealed. Besides, the editor-in-chief has access to many raw articles and brilliant ideas and should not use them for personal advantage.
Review Quality: Normally, the Research Hub LLC journals invite two reviewers to check the manuscript, but depending on the article, that number may increase. Editors also decide on the selection of reviewers, which must not be overshadowed by authors. The selection of reviewers is based on their scientific competence.
Timeliness: The editor-in-chief should immediately incorporate manuscripts into peer review process after initial approvals and quickly respond to authors’ questions.
Decision Quality: Reviewers’ comments along with the editor’s decision letter must be sent to authors. Authors also have the right to know about reviewers’ comments on their manuscript. In the event of disputes between authors and reviewers, the editor-in-chief can help resolve them as a mediator.
Authority: The editor-in-chief of the journal is appointed by the members of the Research Hub LLC Academy. The editor-in-chief must think honestly, independently, and responsibly about boosting the quality of the journal. The editor-in-chief should also select the members of the editorial board and evaluate the rights and responsibilities of these individuals and their performance.
These ethical principles were provided based on the following sources as mentioned below:
Journal of International Business Studies (2015), Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS) Code of Ethics. Accessed 5 September 2015.
Reviewing articles as a professional activity plays a significant role in increasing the quality of the journal’s metrics. Here, Scholars who have published their articles in our journal are invited to assist us in the peer-review process in the future.
In the reviewing process, some manuscripts may be refused for several reasons, such as Insufficient expertise for review a manuscript; and existence of conflict of interest, whether individually or organizationally. Our center has a blind peer review process, and reviewers who feel that the principles of ethical codes have been violated can refuse to review (Please see the JSSHR ethical principles).
Reviewers should evaluate articles fairly, professionally, standardly, and accurately, and communicate their comments honestly to both the author and the editor-in-chief.
The review process of the article is confidential, and the reviewer should not leak any information from the article to people outside the journal.
Reviewers should treat the author with respect. Also, comments should be addressed to the manuscripts, not the author. The reviewers should look at the article in a constructive and supportive manner. Reviewers’ comments should focus on the content and contributions of the manuscripts and should avoid any editorial or linguistic suggestions. They can advise authors to enlist the help of a professional editor to rewrite their manuscripts.
The reviewers should, as far as possible, present objections with convincing arguments. The reviewers should point out strengths as well as weaknesses.
Reviewers should keep in mind that not to comment on acceptance, rejection, or revision to the author. The final opinion of the Reviewers must be communicated to the editor-in-chief in a separate letter.
The reviewers must express their judgments within two weeks. If they can not deliver at this time, they must coordinate with the JSSHR Managing Editor to either request more time or select a new reviewer.
Please upload the following information on a separate page on the journal site:
- Manuscript title
- Author(s) by full name, postal address, phone no., fax no., and e-mail
- Acknowledgments for receiving financial/intellectual support from individuals and organizations, as well as presenting papers at conferences or anywhere else
Article manuscripts should be normally between 8,000 and 10,000 words.
Title: The manuscript title should be concise and specific. Authors are also required to refrain from using abbreviations as much as possible in titles. Considering spacing, the title should not be longer than 40 characters.
Abstract: Research objectives, main results, and key findings should be included in the manuscript abstract. The abstract can be between 150 and 250 words. It should be provided independently of the article, representing the generalities of the manuscript content. References should not be cited in the abstract section, but if a reference is necessary, simply providing author’s name and publication year may suffice. Besides, unusual and non-standard abbreviations must be avoided in the abstract content. However, if it seems important to use abbreviations in the abstract, all words should be fully expressed for the first time, but abbreviations can be recruited in their place in the second time.
Keywords: The keywords chosen by authors should properly inform the article content. Moreover, the keywords should not exceed 6 words.
Introduction: The introduction should clearly state the research objectives, its motivation, and why it was done. An appropriate frame of reference should be also reported in the introduction, but authors should not go into the details about previous results in the related literature. In the section on the theoretical background, authors are however allowed to analyze the results of other studies. Additionally, they must not report a summary of previous research findings in the introduction section. Authors should adequately and clearly argue their contribution to the subject-matter and fill the gap in this field.
Literature Review, Conceptual Framework, and Hypotheses: The background in this section should be broad and comprehensive. Literature reviews should also contain the most relevant studies on the subject-matter (but not too much detail). In this section, theoretical approaches, views, and perspectives in the article should be clearly defined. Research hypotheses should be further formulated in line with the conceptual model developed based on the related literature.
Research Methodology: The research method should be based on references. Readers of the articles need to know whether the data obtained empirically have the required credibility and reliability and are able to support strong conclusions and that an appropriate, systematic, and rigorous method has been practiced in data analysis. Please note that the full details of analyses and statistical results must be included in the main manuscript.
Results: The results should be clear and concise. In this section, the acceptance or rejection of research hypotheses should be statistically specified. As well, authors should be careful not to enter into any interpretations of the literature-based results.
Discussion and Conclusion: This section describes the importance of the results. The topics covered in this section should not be duplicated. Authors must also avoid using too many references in this section and discussing published articles. In conclusion, the main contribution of the article should be clearly stated. Research results should be correspondingly interpreted according to practical concepts for managers. In the last part of the manuscript, limitations and suggestions for future research should be mentioned.
References: All references at the end of the manuscript should be arranged in an alphabetic order. The American Psychological Association (APA) 6th format is the criterion for referencing within the article and that at the end of the manuscript. Please note that all references cited in the article should be mentioned in the reference list. The followings are examples of different types of references:
In-text references:Authors should only cite family name of author (s) and publication year.
- References with one author: Availability is an important feature of a mobile payment system in the banking industry. It should be also capable of providing services to the users throughout the week without interruptions (Hopkins, 2021).
- References with two authors: To foster user acceptance of telemedicine technologies, it is important for healthcare consumers to have a positive attitude towards using such systems (Xu & Hanaoka, 2021).
- References with more than two authors: The results of this research showed that the components of knowledge management have a positive and significant effect on job performance (Li et al., 2021).
- Simultaneous references: When citing a list of references in the text, separate authors by semicolons; for example,The results suggest that systems influence the quality, speed, and accuracy of data collected in the decision-making and affect the performance of government decision-making and public policy followed and adopted by the government agencies and public authorities (Park & Jang, 2021; Marshall et al., 2021).
- Direct quotation: To cite a direct quotation, give pages after the year, separated by a colon and a space; for example: “Boddewyn argues that for something to happen it must be ‘not only favorable and possible but also wanted and triggered’ (Boddewyn, 1988: 538)”.
End-text references: Authors should note that all references are cited completely and uniformly.
- Journal/periodical articles: Lin, D.Y., Fang, J.H, Huang, L. K. (2019). Passenger assignment and pricing strategy for a passenger railway transportation system, Transportation Letters: The International Journal of Transportation Research, 11 (6), 320-331.
- Books: Wasserman, P. D. (1993). Advanced Methods in Neural Computing: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
- Conference papers: Wei, W. (2019). Sensitivity analysis of passenger in different ages to ticket price in Xitong inter-city rail transit. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Electronical Control Technology and Transportation.
- Book chapter: Baker, F. M., & Lightfoot, O. B. (1993). Psychiatric care of ethnic elders. In A. C. Gaw (Ed.), Culture, Ethnicity, and Mental Illness (pp. 517-552). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.
- Dissertations: Gansterer, M. (2008). Optimization in supply chain management. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Vienna.
- Online documents: International Monetary Fund (2019). Fiscal monitor: World economic and financial surveys. From Washington, April. http://www.imfbookstore.org.
Figures and Tables: Line drawings, maps, charts, graphs, diagrams, photos, etc. should be labeled as figures. Tables and figures should be also numbered sequentially. Each table or figure must have at least one sentence in the manuscript to introduce it. Moreover, in-text references to tables should be in a sequential order throughout the article. The manuscript should highlight main points in a table and summarize its message, but not duplicate the details. Tables should not have any lengthy introductory text, and notes should be included as footnotes to tables and not merely repeat texts from the main body of the article. Titles of tables and figures should be short and descriptive. All tables need to be an editable Word document.
Appendix: Authors should refer to in-text when using appendices. If more than one appendix is recruited in the article, it should be indicated with A, B, C, etc.
PDF: Corresponding authors will receive the article in PDF format for their personal use. It is the responsibility of corresponding authors to share this file with co-authors. The PDF version is on loan to corresponding authors and should not be uploaded to other websites in person (even for open access articles). To encourage readers, authors can introduce them to the journal site.
- Use one-inch margins (2.5 cm) at the top, bottom, and sides of the page.
- Follow 11-point Times New Roman font type throughout the manuscript.
- Number all pages in the manuscript, starting with the Abstract Page.
- Apply one space, not two spaces, between sentences.
- Employ left-aligned text in the manuscript.
- State each hypothesis tested separately, give it a number, and indent paragraphs; for example, Hypothesis 1. Absorptive capacity is positively related to the probability of firm.
- Check that the sequence of any numbered elements (tables, figures, equations, etc.) is correct. Double check all mathematical entries in the manuscript before submission. Write out numbers smaller than 10. Insert leading zeros before decimal points in texts and tables (e.g., ‘0.3’ rather than ‘.3’). Report only two decimal places for statistics.
- Please report more conservative two-tailed t-test rather than single-tailed t-test. Report in lower case as: † if p < 0.10, * if p < 0.05; ** if p < 0.01; *** if p < 0.001.
- Place endnotes, references, figures, tables, and appendices at the end of the manuscript. Each component should begin on a new page.
- Put sentences in the active voice (“I did”) instead of the passive one (“It was done”) to make it easy for readers to see who did what. Use the first person (“I” or “we”) to describe what authors did.
- Check and correct spellings and punctuations before submitting the manuscript. Be consistent in capitalization, spelling, hyphenation, and formatting throughout the manuscript. Avoid common usage errors such as “it’s” and “its”, “affect” and “effect”, and “that” and “which”. As well, singular (plural) nouns require singular (plural) pronouns and verbs. “Data” is also a plural noun and “none” is singular. “Who” should be used for people and “that” and “which” should be recruited for organizations. Avoid using “impact” as a verb. Apply semicolons to help define long lists that include both groups and sub-groups. If a clause is inserted in a sentence, use paired commas to set off the clause.
- The reference list should follow the notes at the end of the manuscript in an alphabetical order by author’s name (use the “corporate author” or the journal name where no individual author’s name is given). This list must include all works cited.
- Authors should make certain that the reference for each citation in the text is complete, and that the mentioned dates and the spellings of the authors’ names in the text and references are in agreement. Include full page range for all journal references and book chapters. As well, include both the volume and issue (number [if applicable], season, month, or date) for journal/periodical references.
- Line drawings, maps, charts, graphs, diagrams, photos, etc. should be all labeled as figures.
- Number tables and figures consecutively, using Arabic numerals, in order of appearance (one series for tables and one for figures). Long tables that have many panels should be preferably broken into separately numbered tables.
- Each table or figure must have at least one sentence in the text to introduce it. In-text references to tables should be in a sequential order throughout the manuscript.
- A table should be understandable on its own. The text should highlight the main points in a table and summarize its message, but not duplicate the details. Tables should not have any lengthy introductory text and necessary notes should be included as footnotes to the table and should not repeat the text from the main body of the article.
- Figures and tables should be placed at the end of the manuscript. Each figure or table should begin on a new page.
- Titles of tables and figures should be short and descriptive. They should not contain acronyms, abbreviations, or symbols. The number and the title of each table or figure should be typed on separate lines.
- Make sure the necessary measures of statistical significance are reported for each table.
- Cite sources directly below each table or figure.
- Do not insert tables in the manuscript as pictures. All tables should be editable Word documents. Embedded Excel worksheets are also acceptable, provided that authors have taken into account the amount of data that can reasonably fit on a journal page.
- Tints are not acceptable in figures as they do not reproduce well in printing.