Peer Review Proses

The peer review process is a process in which a journal assesses the quality of a manuscript before it is published and has it reviewed by relevant experts in the field who review and provide comments on the accepted manuscript. The purpose of this process is to assist the editor in determining whether the manuscript should be published in the Jurnal Risalah Kenotariatan.

Key points in the peer review process:

  1. Manuscripts submitted to the journal first go through an initial screening by the editorial team.
  2. Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two peer reviewers for review.
  3. Peer reviewers independently make recommendations to the journal editor on whether the manuscript should be rejected or accepted (with or without revisions).
  4. The journal editor considers all feedback from the peer reviewers and makes a decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

The peer review process for journal publication is essentially a quality control mechanism where experts evaluate manuscripts to ensure the quality of the published work. However, peer reviewers do not make the decision to accept or reject the paper; they only provide recommendations. In a journal, the authority to make decisions lies solely with the journal editor or editorial board.

How does it work? When a manuscript is submitted to the journal, it is assessed to determine if it meets the submission criteria. If yes, the editorial team will select potential peer reviewers in the research field to review the manuscript and provide recommendations. The Jurnal Risalah Kenotariatan uses four types of peer review:

  1. Single-blind: Reviewers are aware of the authors' names, but authors are unaware of who is reviewing their manuscript unless the reviewers choose to sign their reports.
  2. Double-blind: Reviewers are unaware of the authors' names, and authors are unaware of who is reviewing their manuscript.
  3. Open peer: Authors know the identities of the reviewers, and reviewers know the authors' identities. If the manuscript is accepted, named review reports are published alongside the article.
  4. Transparent: Reviewers are aware of the authors' names, but authors are unaware of who is reviewing their manuscript unless the reviewers choose to sign their reports. If the manuscript is accepted, anonymous reviewer reports are published alongside the article.

Why peer review? Peer review is an integral part of scientific publishing that affirms the validity of the manuscript. Peer reviewers are experts who contribute their time to help improve the manuscripts they review.

Steps of peer review:

  1. Paper Submission: Authors submit their manuscript to the Jurnal Risalah Kenotariatan. This is usually done through the online system on the Jurnal Risalah Kenotariatan website, or the journal may accept submissions via authors' emails.
  2. Editorial Evaluation: The editorial team checks the manuscript to ensure it aligns with the journal's template. The quality of the manuscript is not assessed at this stage.
  3. Evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief: The Editor-in-Chief checks whether the manuscript is suitable for the journal, sufficiently original, and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without further review.
  4. Peer Reviewer Invitation: The editor sends invitations to individuals who are suitable reviewers.
  5. Response to Invitation: Potential reviewers consider the invitation based on their expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then accept or decline the invitation. If they decline, they may suggest alternative reviewers.
  6. Review Conducted: Reviewers set aside time to read the manuscript multiple times to form an initial impression and make detailed point-by-point review notes. The review is then submitted to the journal with recommendations for acceptance, rejection, or requests for revisions before reconsideration.
  7. Journal Evaluates Reviews: The editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews are significantly different, the editor may invite additional reviewers to obtain additional opinions before making a decision.
  8. Decision Communicated: The editor sends an email with the decision to the authors, including relevant reviewer comments.
  9. Next Steps: If accepted, the manuscript is sent for production. If rejected or sent back, the authors are asked to revise along with reviewer comments to help improve the manuscript. At this stage, the reviewers are also emailed to inform them of the outcome of the authors' revision. If a revised manuscript is submitted, the reviewers expect the new version, but if only minor changes are requested, the review is done by the editor.