Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Ekonomi dan Pendidikan undergo a structured editorial and peer review process to ensure academic quality, relevance, originality, and contribution to the field.

The journal applies a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening will normally be evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript.

1. Initial Editorial Screening | 3–7 Days

After submission, the editorial team conducts an initial screening to evaluate:

• relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope;
• compliance with the Author Guidelines and journal template;
• completeness and overall quality of the manuscript;
• originality and similarity level; and
• basic academic and methodological quality.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or declined without external review.

Estimated time: 3–7 days.

2. Reviewer Assignment | 3–7 Days

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers whose expertise corresponds to the subject of the manuscript.

The journal applies a double-blind peer review, meaning that the identities of the authors are concealed from reviewers and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

Estimated time for reviewer assignment: 3–7 days.

3. Peer Review | 2–4 Weeks

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on its scientific quality and academic contribution. The main aspects considered include:

• relevance and significance of the research;
• clarity of research objectives;
• adequacy of the literature and theoretical foundation;
• appropriateness of the research methodology;
• accuracy and clarity of the results;
• depth and quality of the discussion;
• originality and contribution of the study;
• relevance and adequacy of references; and
• overall quality of academic writing.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective and constructive comments to assist authors and editors in improving and evaluating the manuscript.

Estimated review period: 2–4 weeks.

4. Reviewer Recommendation

After completing the evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

1. Accept Submission – the manuscript is suitable for publication without substantial revision.
2. Revisions Required – the manuscript requires minor revisions before further consideration.
3. Resubmit for Review – substantial revisions are required and the revised manuscript should undergo further evaluation.
4. Decline Submission – the manuscript does not meet the journal's publication standards or is unsuitable for publication.

Reviewer recommendations are considered by the editor in making an editorial decision and do not automatically constitute the final decision.

5. Author Revision | 7–21 Days

Authors receiving a revision decision are required to revise their manuscripts according to the comments and recommendations provided by the reviewers and editor.

The normal revision period is:

• Minor Revision: 7–14 days
• Major Revision: 14–21 days

Authors should submit the revised manuscript together with clear responses to the reviewers' comments. If additional time is required, authors may contact the editorial office.

Substantially revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

6. Re-Review | 1–2 Weeks, If Required

A revised manuscript may undergo a second round of peer review when substantial changes have been requested or when the editor considers further expert evaluation necessary.

The reviewers assess whether their previous comments have been adequately addressed and whether the revised manuscript meets the journal's scientific standards.

Estimated re-review period: 1–2 weeks.

7. Final Editorial Decision | 3–7 Days

Following the completion of the review and revision process, the Editor-in-Chief or responsible editor makes the final decision based on:

• reviewers' recommendations;
• authors' responses and revisions;
• scientific quality and contribution of the manuscript;
• relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope; and
• compliance with the journal's editorial standards.

The final editorial decision may be accepted, revision required, resubmitted for review, or declined.

Estimated final decision time: 3–7 days after completion of the review process.

8. Copyediting, Proofreading, and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage, including copyediting, layout editing, proofreading, and final verification.

Authors may be asked to review and approve the final proof before publication. After all editorial requirements have been completed, the article will be scheduled for publication in the appropriate issue.

The production and publication schedule depends on the journal's publication queue and issue schedule.

Estimated Processing Time

Under normal circumstances, the journal aims to complete the initial editorial decision within 7 days, the peer review process within 2–4 weeks, and the final decision within approximately 4–8 weeks from the initial submission.

The actual processing time may vary depending on reviewer availability, the extent of revisions required, authors' response time, and whether additional review rounds are necessary.

Process	Estimated Time
Initial Editorial Screening	3–7 days
Reviewer Assignment	3–7 days
Peer Review	2–4 weeks
Minor Revision	7–14 days
Major Revision	14–21 days
Re-review, if required	1–2 weeks
Final Editorial Decision	3–7 days
Overall Submission to Final Decision	Approximately 4–8 weeks

Peer Review Information

Review Model: Double-blind peer review
Number of Reviewers: At least two independent reviewers
Initial Screening: 3–7 days
Review Period: 2–4 weeks
Estimated Final Decision: 4–8 weeks from submission
Final Decision Authority: Editor-in-Chief/Responsible Editor