PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Journal of Indonesian Society Empowerment (JISE) applies a thorough double-blind peer review process to all manuscripts submitted for consideration. In this process, neither the reviewers nor the authors know each other’s identities, ensuring an unbiased review. Here is the whole peer review process, step by step:

1. Submission of Manuscript
Authors submit their manuscript through the JISE submission system. The manuscript must comply with JISE's submission guidelines, formatting, and scope.

2. Initial Editorial Assessment
Upon receiving the manuscript, the Editor performs an initial review to determine if it fits within the journal's scope and meets the submission criteria. If the manuscript is found to be unsuitable, it may be rejected or returned to the author for revisions before proceeding to peer review.

3. Assignment to Peer Reviewers
If the manuscript passes the initial editorial assessment, the Editor assigns it to two or more qualified peer reviewers. These reviewers are selected from JISE’s pool of experts. The peer review process is double-blind, meaning both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other.

4. Reviewers' Evaluation
Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript on several criteria, including:
o Coherence and Harmony: Ensuring that the title, abstract, introduction, results, discussion, and conclusion are logically connected.
o Novelty and Scientific Contribution: Assessing the originality of the research and its contribution to the field.
o Methodological Rigor: Evaluating the robustness of the research design, data collection, and analysis.
o Quality and Relevance of References: Ensuring that cited sources are appropriate and relevant to the manuscript’s topic.

5. Editorial Decision Based on Reviewer Feedback
The Editor reviews the feedback from the peer reviewers and makes a decision. The possible outcomes are:
o Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted as is or with minor revisions.
o Required Revisions: The manuscript requires revisions based on reviewer feedback.
o Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires major revisions, and the authors must resubmit it for a second round of review.
o Reject Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to significant issues in quality or relevance.

6. Communication with Authors
The Editor communicates the decision to the authors, along with reviewers' comments. If revisions are required, the authors are provided with clear instructions on how to improve their manuscript.

7. Revisions and Resubmission
Authors make the necessary revisions as suggested by the reviewers and resubmit the manuscript. The revised manuscript is then re-evaluated by the Editor and, if needed, by the same reviewers. This process ensures that the manuscript addresses all feedback and meets the journal’s standards.

8. Final Decision
After the revisions are made, the Editor makes the final decision on whether the manuscript is acceptable for publication. The final acceptance of the manuscript is based on the quality of the revisions and the reviewers' feedback.

9. Publication Scheduling
Once accepted, the manuscript is scheduled for publication. The Editor-in-Chief determines the order of publication, considering factors such as the date of receipt and geographical distribution of the authors to ensure balanced representation.
________________________________________
Timeline and Duration:
• Peer Review Duration: The entire peer review process typically lasts between 4 to 8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.
• Reviewer Deadline: Reviewers are given 14 working days to complete their review. If a reviewer cannot meet the deadline, an alternate reviewer is appointed immediately by the Editorial Board Chair to ensure no delays.