Peer Review Process

Authors who submit their papers to Jurnal Alfa usually receive acknowledgement of receipt of their articles within 1 week of submission. The review process will take about 3 months. Article submissions almost always receive a note to carry out major or minor revisions, which should be revised as the reviewers' suggestion, but submissions that are linguistically weak will immediately be rejected (e.g., when the language is inadequate that one cannot understand what the authors mean). 

Jurnal Alfa uses double-blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. As part of the submission, the journal will peer-review your manuscript before deciding whether to publish it or not. The final decision of article acceptance will be made by editors according to reviewers' comments. The process is explained in the flowchart below:

PEER REVIEWING GUIDELINES FOR EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

PRINCIPLES TO UPHOLD

Jurnal Alfa peer review process is double-blind to avoid conflicts of interest and discrimination based on nationality/gender/belief. We advise reviewers to not write their names or affiliations in their feedback comments. Although you may recommend authors to cite your papers (if relevant), please also recommend other relevant studies that you do not own to avoid clearly revealing your identity to the author.

As reviewers, your aim is to provide authors with constructive feedback so that they can make improvements to their work. Keep in mind that the manuscript sent to you is a privileged confidential document. This means that you cannot use the information obtained during the peer-review process for your own or any other person's or organization's advantage or disadvantage.

REVIEW TIMELINE

When you receive an email request for review, you will have 7 days to log in to your account and declare whether you 'accept' or 'decline' the review request. You will receive the necessary information of the manuscript (title, abstract, keywords), and you will be asked to declare any competing interests. Jurnal Alfa only assigns one reviewer with 1-2 manuscripts at a time, although reviewers may request to review more manuscripts via email or the For Editor Only comment.

After you accept the review request, you will have an additional 14 days to complete and submit your review. Once you have submitted your review, we will send you a PDF file of the Certificate of Appreciation (which you can freely use to enhance your track record).

If you have not submitted a review after 14 days have passed, we will either send you an email reminder and extend the deadline by one week or inform you that we have decided to cancel our request. Reviewers who have accepted the request but could not complete it within the deadline due to circumstances may email the managing editor at alfapustaka23@gmail.com to request a deadline extension by an additional two weeks. This extension request can only be done once for every manuscript.

We ask reviewers who decide to decline the request to inform us of their reasons. If it is due to a mismatch of topic/area of expertise, we will take your preferences into account in our future requests. In the case of a heavy workload or simply having no time, we will take note of it too and hold off from requesting your assistance for the next four weeks.

TECHNICAL GUIDELINE

Use the Comment function on Microsoft Word to enter your comments. Go to your Microsoft Word's General Option settings to ensure that the username of your Word software will not declare or reveal your identity to the author, as per the double-blind peer review policy.

Use the Track Change function if you are editing the body text directly so that the authors will know whether or not you have made changes in their manuscripts.

Please prioritize suggesting solutions and crafting constructive feedback beyond simply informing the authors "what the introduction should cover" or "what the discussion should be like." Remember that authors will welcome positive feedback as well as valuable criticism from you.

EVALUATION GUIDELINE IN THE JOURNAL SYSTEM

In making your report, please ensure that you provide a clear verdict on the paper:

  • Accept Submission (If you think that the manuscript is close to perfect and little revision is needed, detailed comments to justify the quality will be required.)
  • Revisions revisions required (Minor Revisions; the revised manuscript will not normally be returned to you for checking)
  • Resubmit for Review (Major Revisions; you will normally receive the revised manuscript for re-review)
  • Resubmit Elsewhere (If you think the manuscript does not fit into Jurnal Alfa focus and scope, mind if the manuscript's quality is acceptable or not.)
  • Rejected (If you found that the manuscript contains too many errors or violates the publication ethics)

Your review will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. You should try to answer these questions in either or both the comment box to the author or the editor. Your answers can go through all questions systematically or in summary form, as long as your overall impression of the manuscript's eligibility for future publication is clear.

  • Does the manuscript provide insight into an important issue, especially a recent issue?
  • Does the manuscript present their research gaps and novelty clearly?
  • Is the manuscript interesting, and does it have a significant chance of being cited by an international audience?
  • Do the results from the manuscript stimulate new, important questions?

AFTER SUBMISSION OF REVIEW

The editor will evaluate your report and the manuscript. In 1-5 days, we will send you a Certificate of Appreciation for the manuscript as our form of appreciation. If you are a first-time reviewer for Jurnal Alfa, we will add your name, affiliation, and track record to the Editors page.

We will also recommend you submit your email of acknowledgement and certificate to Publons (reviews@publons.com) so that your record of accomplishment as a reviewer is traceable. Last but not least, we would highly appreciate it if you would endorse Jurnal Alfa in Publons.

FURTHER INVOLVEMENT

If you have further insight or need to rectify part of your review, you may add a discussion in the journal system or email the journal manager. The editor or section editor will correspond with you.

Depending on the manuscript's revision, if an additional round of review is needed, we may request you to review the paper for a second time, but not more unless you inform us that you are willing to.