Peer Review Process
To ensure the quality, validity, and academic contribution of articles published in Jurnal Paryavarana, the peer review process is conducted using a double-anonymous peer-review method. This process is executed objectively and independently in accordance with applicable editorial policies.
- The types of manuscripts reviewed include qualitative research, quantitative research, and mixed-methods research.
- At the initial stage, the Editor conducts an initial screening of all submitted manuscripts. During this phase, the Editor assesses the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope, adherence to author guidelines, and plagiarism check results. Manuscripts failing to meet these requirements may be rejected at this stage without proceeding to peer review. Manuscripts passing the initial selection are sent to two reviewers for further assessment. Decisions at this stage typically take approximately two weeks.
- Jurnal Paryavarana uses a double-anonymous peer review method, wherein the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from one another to maintain objectivity and independence during the evaluation process.
- Reviewers of the manuscript that will be assessed are selected based on the alignment of their expertise and academic background with the manuscript’s topic. Assigned reviewers are requested to evaluate the manuscript by considering several aspects, including:
- Originality and novelty of the research;
- Clarity of structure and writing flow;
- Coherence of argumentation;
- Adherence to scientific writing ethics;
- Methodological accuracy;
- Validity of results and conclusions; and
- Relevance and currency of references.
While grammatical correction is not the reviewer’s primary responsibility, they may offer suggestions regarding linguistic clarity if necessary.
- The review process generally takes approximately two weeks. If a reviewer fails to respond within one to two weeks, the Editor reserves the right to reassign the task to another reviewer. Reviewers provide recommendations into one of the following categories: Accepted, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Rejected.
- Should revisions be required, authors will receive notification along with reviewer comments through the journal system and/or email. Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated to ensure all reviewer and editor feedback has been adequately addressed.
- The final decision to Accept or Reject is communicated to the author, potentially accompanied by additional notes from the reviewers or Editor.
- Prior to publication, the Editor may request final corrections regarding language clarity, manuscript formatting, and the presentation of figures and tables. Subsequently, the Editor will send the final manuscript along with an authorship approval form to the author for confirmation prior to publication.
Manuscript Decision Categories
Accepted
The manuscript is accepted for publication as it meets scientific standards, substance requirements, and technical journal writing guidelines, requiring no further revisions.
Accepted with Minor Revisions
The manuscript is accepted subject to minor revisions. The author is required to address specific issues, such as grammatical precision, citation compliance, or brief clarifications, provided that these adjustments do not alter the substantive content of the research.
Accepted with Major Revisions
The manuscript is precluded from acceptance in its current form and requires extensive revision. Significant improvements regarding methodology, data analysis, discussion depth, or bibliographic completeness are necessary before the work can be reconsidered for publication.
Rejected
The manuscript is rejected by the Reviewer due to failure to meet scientific quality standards, mismatch with the journal’s focus and scope, fundamental methodological flaws, or violation of publication ethics.
Desk Rejection
The manuscript is rejected by the Editor prior to the peer review process due to incompatibility with the scope, non-compliance with author guidelines, a high similarity index (plagiarism), or insufficient academic quality.
