Peer Review Process

INKLUSI: Journal of Disability Studies applies a double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, objectivity, and fairness of editorial decision-making. The peer review process is conducted through several structured stages as outlined below:

 

Editorial Screening (Desk Review)

All submitted manuscripts first undergo an editorial screening (desk review) conducted by the editorial team, coordinated by the Managing Editor. At this stage, manuscripts are assessed to determine:

  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope
  • Originality
  • Compliance with author guidelines

  • Adherence to ethical standards, including plagiarism screening

Manuscripts that do not fit the journal's ethics policy or do not meet the standards of the journal will be rejected without peer-review. The submitted manuscripts is acknowledged within 2 weeks upon receipt.

 

Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass this stage are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s field of study. The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process. Manuscripts are evaluated based on academic quality, methodological rigor, clarity and coherence of argumentation, and scholarly contribution.

 

The standard peer review process takes approximately 4 - 8 weeks, depending on the availability and responsiveness of reviewers. Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the assigned time frame and to provide clear, constructive, and objective comments to support editorial decision-making. 

 

Editorial Decision

All manuscripts that undergo peer review receive at least two independent review reports. The editorial team considers the reviewers’ recommendations and communicates the editorial decision to the authors through the journal’s submission system. The decision will be one of the following:

  • Accept submission: The paper is a successful completion of the journal’s terms and conditions. The accepted paper is processed for copyediting.
  • Revision Required: The manuscript has scholarly merit but requires revisions in response to reviewers’ and editors’ comments before it can be reconsidered for publication. Authors are required to revise and resubmit the manuscript within the timeframe specified by the editors.
  • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial conceptual, methodological, or structural improvement and cannot be accepted through a standard revision process. Authors are encouraged to undertake significant revisions and resubmit the manuscript for reconsideration. The resubmitted manuscript may be treated as a new submission and, if deemed suitable, may enter a new round of peer review.
  • Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to serious methodological, conceptual, or ethical concerns, or because it does not make a sufficient original contribution to the field.

Conflict of Interest and Editorial Independence

All editors and reviewers are required to disclose any conflicts of interest prior to handling or reviewing a manuscript. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of the manuscript’s academic merit and are not influenced by the authors’ personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, or other non-academic considerations.