Peer Review Process

Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun

Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun (JIP) adheres to a Double-Blind Peer-Review process that is rapid and fair, and also ensures a high quality of articles published. This statement is based on COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. 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. The Editorial board may reject a manuscript without peer review if that paper is judged not to meet the journal minimum required qualifications.
 
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. To be published in JIP, a paper should meet four (4) general criteria:
  1. Provides strong evidence for its conclusions.
  2. Novelty (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 Submission;
  2. Revisions Required;
  3. Resubmit for Review;
  4. Resubmit Elsewhere;
  5. Decline Submission;
  6. See comments.
Read more to get the information about Editorial WorkflowReviewer Guidelines and Author Guidelines for this Journal.