Peer-review Process

The articles submitted to this journal will be evaluated through initial review processes by Editorial Team. The editorial team will initially scrutinize each submission (with the help of tools like Grammarly and Turnitin etc.) for relevance, scope, quality, and similarity. The article can be rejected if it does not meet the journal requirement.

After initial review, manuscripts will be sent for review to at least two relevant and experienced reviewers. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review (either authors or reviewers do not know each other's identities). Authors will be asked to revise their article if there are revisions required from the reviewers. The final decision of articles acceptance will be made by Editors according to the reviewer's comments. The accepted articles will be available online. Language used in this journal is English or Indonesia.

Editorial and Peer-Review Workflow

0. Pre-Submission

Responsible: Desk Editor

Before formal submission, authors are encouraged to ensure that their manuscript complies with the journal’s basic requirements. At this stage, a pre-submission check may be conducted by the Desk Editor, focusing on:

• similarity and originality screening (e.g., Turnitin or AI similarity check),

• basic compliance with author guidelines,

• confirmation of required ethical statements and declarations.

This step is intended to minimize administrative issues and reduce delays during the formal editorial screening stage.

1. Manuscript Submission

Responsible: Author

Authors initiate the publication process by submitting their manuscript through the journal’s online submission system. At this stage, authors are required to upload all mandatory files, including the main manuscript, supplementary materials (if any), and ethical declarations. The system automatically records the submission date and assigns a manuscript identification number for tracking purposes.

2. Editorial Screening

Responsible: Desk Editor, Editor 

Upon submission, the manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening conducted by the Editor or Managing Editor. This stage generally takes approximately one week and focuses on ensuring the manuscript’s basic eligibility for further review.

The screening includes:

• verification of submission completeness and adherence to author guidelines,

• assessment of alignment with the journal’s aims and scope,

• evaluation of basic scholarly quality and ethical compliance,

• preliminary originality and plagiarism screening.

Manuscripts that do not meet these minimum criteria may be returned to authors or rejected at this stage. Manuscripts that pass the screening proceed to the next step.

3. Expert Consultation (if needed)

Responsible party: Editor 

For manuscripts addressing highly specialized, interdisciplinary, or emerging topics, the Editor may seek input from an external expert. This consultation supports editorial judgment, particularly regarding technical relevance, novelty, or methodological soundness.

This step is optional and does not replace formal peer review. Its purpose is to strengthen the fairness and quality of the editorial decision-making process.

4. Peer Review

Responsible party: Reviewers, Editor 

Manuscripts approved for review are evaluated through an independent peer-review process. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and academic background relevant to the manuscript’s subject area.

Reviewers are asked to assess:

• scientific rigor and methodological soundness,

• originality and contribution to the field,

• clarity of presentation and organization,

• ethical standards and research integrity.

The peer-review process typically requires one to three months, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

5. Revision Loop

Responsible: Author, Reviewers, Editor 

Based on reviewer feedback, authors may be requested to revise their manuscript. Revisions can be categorized as:

• minor revisions,

• major revisions.

Authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewers, explaining how each comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by reviewers, and this review–revision cycle may repeat until a final recommendation is reached.

6. Editorial Decision

Responsible: Editor 

After considering reviewer reports and revision outcomes, the Editor makes an official editorial decision. Possible decisions include:

• Reject : the manuscript does not meet publication standards,

• Proceed toward acceptance: the manuscript advances to the final preparation stages.

The editorial decision is communicated to the authors through the journal system. Direct communication between authors and reviewers is not permitted.

7. Pre-Acceptance and Formatting

Responsible: Desk Editor 

Manuscripts that proceed toward acceptance enter the pre-acceptance stage, where they are prepared for publication. This includes:

• formatting according to the journal’s style and layout requirements,

• consistency checks for figures, tables, and references,

• final editorial polishing.

• Generative AI use and Similarity Check

This step ensures that the manuscript meets the journal’s technical and visual standards before final approval.

8. Acceptance

Responsible: Editor 

Once all editorial and formatting requirements are fulfilled, the manuscript receives official acceptance. At this stage, the article is formally approved for publication, and authors are notified of the acceptance decision.

9. Proofs and Publication

Responsible: Desk Editor, Author, Publisher 

In the final stage, the accepted manuscript undergoes:

• final proofreading and copyediting,

• preparation of galley proofs,

• author verification and confirmation.

After proof approval, the article is published online and becomes accessible to readers through the journal’s platform.