Proses Peer Review

The editor-in-chief will assign the manuscript to the managing editor or editors for further handling. The managing editor will request at least two scientists to review the research article manuscript. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review, with the reviewer and author identities concealed from each other throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence. All papers are fully peer-reviewed. We only publish articles that have been reviewed and approved by highly qualified researchers with expertise in a field appropriate to the article (at least two reviewers per article). Alam Barajo: Journal of Government and Political Studies maintains the standards of double-blind peer review while increasing the efficiency of the process.
Alam Barajo: Journal of Government and Political Studies applies a two-stage process. After the technical check, the submission will be reviewed by the editorial team for suitability for publication in the journal. If suitable, it will then be assigned to an editor to handle the review and decision process.
If the manuscript matches the journal's scope and criteria, it will be assigned to an editor. The editor will find and contact two reviewers who are experts in the field. Peer review is voluntary, so it can take time. The editor will send regular reminders if reviewers do not respond promptly. During this stage, the status will display as "Under Review".
Once the editor has received the minimum number of expert reviews, the status will change to "Required Reviews Complete".
Sometimes, the editor may decide your manuscript does not fit the journal's scope or criteria. In this case, the editor will notify the authors immediately of rejection and might suggest a more suitable journal.
Editors can also seek additional reviews when needed. The authors will be advised when the Editors decide that further review is required. In short, the steps are:
  1. Manuscript submission (by author).
  2. Manuscript check and selection follow submission, streamlining the process.
  3. Editors have the right to directly accept, reject, or review. Before further processing, each manuscript undergoes a plagiarism check.
  4. The manuscript is reviewed by selected experts.
  5. Editors notify authors of acceptance, revision, or rejection based on reviewer comments.
  6. Paper revision (by author)
  7. Authors submit revisions with changes based on reviewer suggestions, following the same process as the initial submission.
  8. If the reviewer appears satisfied with the revision, a notification of acceptance (by the editor) will be sent.
  9. Galley proof and publishing process.
The steps from points 1 to 5 constitute 1 round of the peer-reviewing process. The editor or the editorial board considers the peer reviewers' feedback before arriving at a final decision. The following are the most common decisions:
  1. Accepted as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form.
  2. Accepted by minor revisions, the journal will publish the paper and ask the author to make small corrections (let authors revise within stipulated time);
  3. Accepted by major revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revise within a stipulated time).
  4. Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision-making after the authors make major changes.
Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.