Peer Review Process

Double-blind Review Process

In our peer review process, the identity of the author remains undisclosed to the reviewers, and similarly, the identities of the reviewers are kept confidential from the author. Beyond the framework of the triple-anonymous review model, this model stands as the most reliable approach to guarantee impartiality throughout the evaluation process.

This structure emphasizes the merit of the manuscript's content as the primary criterion for assessment, effectively neutralizing the potential for reviewer bias. Such bias, whether it manifests in a positive or negative manner, and whether it is deliberate or inadvertent, is thus systematically mitigated.

The following are the four main steps of the review process.

  1. Every article submitted to Jurnal Sosiologi Reflektif is firstly checked for article component completeness of article components, alignment with the journal’s focus and scope, novelty, adherence to the JSR’s template and guidelines.
  2. The assigned (section) editor will invite reviewers to give proper assessment and judgement of the submitted manuscript.
  3. The result of the review will be communicated to the editor for onward transmission to the author(s). In a review result report, a reviewer recomments one of the following four: a. Accept Submission, b. Revisions Required, c. Resubmit for Review or d. Decline Submission.
  4. If required, the author(s) will revise the manuscript in light of the reviewers’ comments and suggestions and resubmit the manuscript. When the manuscript is finally accepted for publication, the editor will schedule the publication and inform the author(s) of the particular number and volume of the journal in which the article will be published. 

Revisions

Minor revisions

This varies from journal to journal. However, minor revisions often require the author to make relatively small adjustments to the paper, which don’t take much time. They might be related to author guideline requirements, e.g. a slight reduction in word count; formatting changes, such as the labelling of tables or figures; further evidence of an understanding of the research literature in the field; or a slight elaboration on the research findings.

Major revisions

Major revisions often require the author to make more significant improvements, the type which take weeks or even months, rather than days. Authors may be asked to address flaws in the methodology; collect more data; conduct a more thorough analysis; or even adjust the research question to ensure the paper contributes something truly original to the body of work.