Peer Review

Every published content under “Articles” section is subject for peer review. Published contents under “Editorial” section are not peer-reviewed.

Peer review in the journal is conducted by external reviewers. They were selected based on their expertise and latest publications in the related topics of submitted manuscripts. At least two reviewers are selected for each submission. The journal didn’t ask author(s) for recommended reviewers to avoid any misconduct in peer review process. At some point, editorial board members can also be selected as reviewers of a manuscript. List of reviewers of each edition is provided in published issue and list of all reviewers is available at

Following A Standard Terminology for Peer Review, type of peer review process in the journal can be summarized as follows:

Identity Transparency: Double Anonymized

Reviewer identity is not made visible to author, author identity is not made visible to reviewer, reviewer and author identity is visible to (decision-making) editor.

Reviewer Interacts with: Editor

Communication between editor and reviewer (traditional model). Also known as ‘independent review’. Identities can be anonymized or visible.

Review Information Published: Review Reports

Full content of the reviewer reports is published. At this moment, the journal only published review reports for accepted manuscripts from Vol. 39, No. 1, 2021.

Post Publication Commenting: Open

Commenting open to anybody. Can be anonymous, require signing in and/or registration (e.g. via ORCID). At this moment, commenting can be sent through email to editor. In the future, a “Comments” section may be prepared for this purpose.

The peer review process in the journal can be described as follow:

  • Each submitted article will be firstly checked by the editor-in-chief for journal standards, the relevance of topics, and plagiarism check.
  • When an article meets journal standard, the relevance of topics, and plagiarism check, the editor-in-chief assign a managing editor or a section editor who will send the article to at least two reviewers.
  • The journal applies a double-blind policy for the peer review process. The author sends the article with no knowledge of reviewers and the author's name is enclosed to reviewers.
  • After receiving the review results, the editor-in-chief will decide whether the article should be accepted, accepted after revision, or rejected. Reviewers will also be notified regarding this decision.
  • Once an article is accepted, it will be sent to a copy editor and a layout editor for the final process before publishing. During these steps, communication between author(s), editor-in-chief, copy editor, and layout editor are conducted within Open Journal Systems.

Published contents will include dates of submission, revision(s), acceptance, and publication.