Peer Review Process
Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif (JSR) maintains high editorial standards through an initial pre-review assessment followed by a double-blind peer review process to ensure the academic quality, integrity, and scholarly merit of manuscripts submitted for publication.
1. PRE-REVIEW
Original Empirical Research and Review Article
The Editor-in-Chief assigns the Managing Editor to conduct an initial assessment (pre-review) of submitted manuscripts to determine whether their content aligns with the journal's Aim and Scope and complies with the Author Guidelines and manuscript template.
If a submission does not meet these requirements, the Managing Editor will request revisions and specify a deadline for their submission. Manuscripts that meet the requirements, either upon initial submission or following revision, will proceed to the peer review stage.
Submissions will be rejected if authors fail to respond to revision requests after receiving two reminders.
The peer review process is coordinated by the Managing Editor. In exceptional cases, manuscripts addressing specialized topics may be assigned to a member of the Editorial Team whose expertise aligns with the subject matter.
Book Review
Book review submissions are handled by the Book Review Editor, who assesses their alignment with the journal's Aim and Scope, and Author Guidelines. Submissions that meet these requirements will proceed to the peer review stage.
2. REVIEWERS
Each research article submitted to Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif (JSR) is evaluated by 3 (three) independent reviewers whose academic disciplines and areas of expertise are relevant to the manuscript's research topic. Book review submissions are evaluated by 2 (two) independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.
Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, subject knowledge, and absence of conflicts of interest. Before accepting an assignment, reviewers must confirm their availability and willingness to participate. They are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and decline or withdraw from the review process if such interests could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their objectivity.
All submissions undergo at least one round of peer review. Additional review rounds may be required depending on the reviewers' recommendations, the extent of revisions requested, and the editorial assessment of the revised manuscript. The final publication decision rests with the JSR editorial team, taking into account the reviewers' evaluations, the quality of the revisions, and compliance with the journal's scholarly and ethical standards.
3. DOUBLE-BLIND PEER REVIEW
JSR follows a double-blind peer review system, ensuring that authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another throughout the evaluation process.
Reviewers are responsible for protecting the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and must not disclose or use unpublished materials or information obtained during peer review for personal, professional, financial, or competitive advantage.
JSR does not permit reviewers to use generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT or similar platforms, to conduct or assist with manuscript evaluations. Reviewers must not upload or enter any part of a submitted manuscript, including research data, figures, tables, or other unpublished materials, into AI systems.
For further information, please refer to JSR's Policy on the Use of Generative AI in Peer Review.
4. REVIEW CRITERIA AND PUBLICATION ETHICS
JSR manuscripts primarily on their academic substance, sociological relevance, and scholarly quality, considering the following criteria:
- Significance and relevance of the research;
- Originality of the study;
- Clarity of the research gap and engagement with existing scholarship (state of the art);
- Contribution to sociological knowledge and theoretical development;
- Appropriateness and methodological rigor of the research design;
- Validity and consistency of data analysis and research findings;
- Depth of sociological analysis, discussion, and conclusions; and
- Compliance with publication ethics and identification of potential ethical concerns.
Reviewers are also responsible for identifying and reporting suspected plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or other violations of publication ethics encountered during manuscript evaluation.
JSR applies a two-stage integrity assessment, beginning with preliminary screening by editors (pre-review) and followed by further examination during peer review. Any ethical concerns raised by reviewers are subsequently assessed by the editorial team in accordance with JSR's publication ethics policies and relevant Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.
All reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, evidence-based, and academically justified evaluations.
5. SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS
Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif (JSR) may include relevant supplementary materials in the peer review process when additional information is needed to evaluate the scholarly quality, validity, and completeness of the submitted research.
6. EDITORIAL DECISION
JSR holds final responsibility for publication decisions, considering the manuscript's overall academic quality, initial editorial assessment, peer review reports, reviewers' feedback and recommendations, and applicable editorial and ethical standards.
Although reviewers' evaluations inform the decision-making process, their recommendations do not independently determine the final outcome. The editor may seek further clarification, request additional reviews, or conduct further assessments when necessary.
JSR applies the following editorial decisions:
- Accept Submission: The manuscript is approved for publication.
- Revision Required: The manuscript must be revised and may undergo further editorial evaluation.
- Resubmit for Review: Substantial revisions are necessary before the manuscript can be reconsidered through another round of peer review.
- Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected and will not be published in JSR.
Submission to JSR does not guarantee acceptance or subsequent publication.
7. REVIEW TIMELINE AND MANUSCRIPT WITHDRAWAL
JSR requires reviewers to complete each round of peer review following their acceptance of the review invitation.
If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, JSR may extend the review period or assign another reviewer to maintain the continuity of the evaluation process.
Authors may formally request manuscript withdrawal if no progress or updates have been made in the editorial process for at least four (6) months after submission. Such requests must be submitted to the JSR editorial office and will be handled according to the journal's withdrawal policy.
8. REVIEW REPORTS AND PUBLICATION DATES
JSR maintains the confidentiality of peer review reports. Reviewers' assessments are not made publicly available alongside published articles, and reports shared with authors do not disclose reviewers' identities or signatures.
Each Research Article and Review Article published in JSR provides a record of its publication history, including:
- Received: The date the manuscript was initially submitted to JSR.
- Revised: The date the journal received the final revised manuscript.
- Accepted: The date the article received formal approval for publication.
- Published: The date the article was officially released by JSR.
9. JSR POLICY STATEMENT ON PEER REVIEW
JSR ensures that its peer review process is conducted with impartiality, confidentiality, academic integrity, and scholarly rigor, in accordance with the relevant ethical principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Final publication decisions are made by the JSR editorial team based on the initial editorial assessment, peer review reports, reviewers' recommendations, and applicable academic and ethical standards.
