Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process is the process by which a journal evaluates the quality of a manuscript before publication, reviewed by relevant experts in the field to review and comment on the accepted manuscript. This process aims to assist the editor in determining whether a manuscript should be published in Vox Populi: Jurnal Umum Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat.

Key Points in the Peer Review Process:

  1. Initial Screening
    Manuscripts submitted to the journal are first screened by the editorial team.

  2. Peer Reviewer Selection
    Manuscripts that pass the screening are sent to at least two peer reviewers for evaluation.

  3. Recommendations from Peer Reviewers
    Peer reviewers independently make recommendations to the journal editor on whether the manuscript should be accepted or rejected (with or without revisions).

  4. Editor’s Decision
    The journal editor considers all feedback from peer reviewers and makes a decision on whether to accept or reject the manuscript.

  5. Quality Control Mechanism
    The Peer Review Process in journal publication is essentially a quality control mechanism, where experts evaluate manuscripts to ensure the quality of published works. However, peer reviewers do not make the final decision to accept or reject the paper, but they provide a recommendation. The authority to make the final decision rests solely with the journal editor or editorial board.

How It Works:

When a manuscript is submitted to the journal, it is evaluated to see if it meets the submission criteria. If it does, the editorial team selects potential peer reviewers from the field of research to review the manuscript and make recommendations. There are four types of peer review used by Vox Populi: Jurnal Umum Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat:

  1. Single-blind
    The reviewer knows the author's name, but the author does not know who reviewed their manuscript unless the reviewer chooses to sign their report.

  2. Double-blind
    The reviewer does not know the author's name, and the author does not know who is reviewing their manuscript.

  3. Open Peer
    The author knows who the reviewer is, and the reviewer knows who the author is. If the manuscript is accepted, the named review report is published alongside the article.

  4. Transparent
    The reviewer knows the author's name, but the author does not know who reviewed their manuscript unless the reviewer chooses to sign their report. If the manuscript is accepted, the anonymous review report is published alongside the article.

Why Peer Review?

Peer review is an integral part of scientific publication, ensuring the validity of the manuscript. Peer reviewers are experts who donate their time to help refine the manuscript they are reviewing.

Peer Review Steps:

  1. Manuscript Submission
    Authors submit their manuscripts to the journal via the online system on the journal's website, or the journal may accept submissions via email.

  2. Editorial Team Assessment
    The editorial team checks the manuscript to ensure it adheres to the journal's template. Manuscript quality is not assessed at this stage.

  3. Editor-in-Chief Review
    The editor-in-chief ensures that the manuscript fits the journal, is sufficiently original, and is of interest. If not, the paper may be rejected without further review.

  4. Peer Reviewer Invitation
    The editor sends an invitation to appropriate individuals to serve as peer reviewers.

  5. Response to Invitation
    The potential reviewer considers the invitation based on their expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline the invitation. If they decline, they may suggest alternative reviewers.

  6. Review Conducted
    Reviewers set aside time to read the manuscript several times to form an initial impression and make detailed, point-by-point notes. The review is then submitted to the journal with recommendations to accept or reject it, or with a request for revision before reconsideration.

  7. Journal Evaluates Review
    The editor considers all returned reviews before making a final decision. If the reviews differ significantly, the editor may invite additional reviewers for further opinions before making a decision.

  8. Decision Communication
    The editor sends an email decision to the author, including relevant reviewer comments.

  9. Next Steps
    If accepted, the manuscript moves to production. If rejected or returned, the author is asked to revise it, accompanied by the reviewers' comments to help improve the manuscript. At this stage, reviewers are also emailed to inform them of the author's revision results. If the manuscript is resubmitted, reviewers expect the new version, but if only minor changes are requested, the review may be done by the editor.