Peer Review Process

Jurnal Aksi Penelitian dan Pengabdian Nusantara is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Every manuscript submitted to the journal is subject to a rigorous peer review process conducted by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript’s subject area. The peer review process aims to assess the quality, originality, relevance, and academic contribution of the submitted manuscripts and to ensure the credibility and integrity of published articles.

The peer review process in Jurnal Aksi Penelitian dan Pengabdian Nusantara consists of the following nine steps:

1. Submission of Manuscript

The corresponding author submits the manuscript to the journal through the online submission system supported by Open Journal Systems (OJS). To facilitate authors, the journal may temporarily accept manuscript submissions via email.

2. Editorial Office Assessment

The submitted manuscript is initially evaluated by the editorial team to ensure its compliance with the journal’s focus and scope. The manuscript is also checked against the Author Guidelines to confirm proper structure, formatting, and completeness. At this stage, the editor conducts a preliminary quality assessment, including the identification of major methodological flaws. Manuscripts that pass this stage are screened for plagiarism using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin).

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief assesses the manuscript for originality, relevance, scientific significance, and suitability for publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards may be rejected at this stage without proceeding to the peer review process.

4. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor invites qualified reviewers based on their expertise, research interests, and absence of conflicts of interest. Jurnal Aksi Penelitian dan Pengabdian Nusantara involves reviewers from various fields of social sciences, including communication, management, economics, education, culture, law, social health, and religious studies. The journal applies a double-blind review system, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

5. Response to Review Invitations

Invited reviewers evaluate the invitation based on their expertise, availability, and potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers may accept or decline the invitation. If declining, reviewers may suggest alternative reviewers with relevant expertise.

6. Review Process

Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript through multiple readings. The initial reading focuses on forming a general assessment of the manuscript. If significant issues are identified, the reviewer may recommend rejection. Otherwise, reviewers conduct a detailed evaluation and provide constructive feedback, along with a recommendation to accept, reject, or request revisions (major or minor).

7. Editorial Evaluation of Reviews

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor review all reviewer reports before making a decision. In cases where reviewer recommendations differ significantly, an additional reviewer may be invited to provide an independent assessment.

8. Communication of Decision

The editorial decision, along with anonymized reviewer comments, is communicated to the corresponding author. Reviewers are also informed of the final decision regarding the manuscript.

9. Final Decision and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copy-editing and layout preparation. Manuscripts requiring revision must be revised by the authors in accordance with reviewer comments and resubmitted to the editor. Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the reviewers or assessed directly by the handling editor, depending on the extent of revisions required.

Once the revised manuscript meets the journal’s standards, it is accepted for publication. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief. The peer review process typically takes 1–2 weeks. Accepted articles are published online and are freely available as downloadable PDF files.