Review Process

Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun

Review Process

Every manuscript submitted to Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun is reviewed by at least two reviewers independently in the form of "double-blind review". Decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based upon their reports/recommendation. In certain cases, the editor may submit an article for review to another, third reviewer before making a decision, if necessary.
JIP receives many more submissions than can be published. Therefore, we ask peer-reviewers to keep in mind that every paper that is accepted means that another good paper must be rejected. The Editorial board may reject a manuscript without peer review if that paper is judged not to meet the journal minimum required qualifications.
The evaluation procedures are under constant review and the JIP editor works closely with the members of the review committees and the Council of Scientists to ensure that all applications are assessed fairly and thoroughly. One editor will usually take each article through from start to finish. The JIP team of research editors aims to read all of newly submitted research articles within three days. If your article is potentially suitable for the JIP that editor will ask a senior colleague to approve it, and, if that succeeds, he or she will send your article to two external peer reviewers. Usually the final result of the paper review is sent to the authors within 3-4 weeks working days.
 
The peer-review process is Double Blind Review. Both the reviewer and the author are anonymous. Author anonymity prevents any reviewer bias, for example based on an author's country of origin or previous controversial work. Articles written by prestigious or renowned authors are considered on the basis of the content of their papers, rather than their reputation. Reviewers can often identify the author through their writing style, subject matter or self-citation.
To be published in JIP, a paper should meet four (4) general criteria:
  1. Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.
  2. Novel (we do not consider meeting report abstracts and preprints on community servers to compromise novelty).
  3. Of extreme importance to scientists in the specific field.
  4. Ideally, interesting to researchers in other related disciplines.
In general, to be acceptable, a paper should represent an advance in understanding likely to influence thinking in the field. There should be a discernible reason why the work deserves the visibility of publication in a JIP rather than the best of the specialist journals.
 
The reviewers will then submit their reports on the manuscripts along with their recommendation of one of the following actions to the Editor:
1. Accept to Publish (Publish Unaltered)
2. Accept with Consider after Minor Changes
3. Accept with Consider after Major Changes
4. Rejected: Manuscript is flawed or not sufficiently.
 
Read more about the Editorial Workflow for this Journal.