Peer Review Process

1. Type of Review

The Jurnal Global of Institute implements a Double-Blind Peer Review system, where:

  • Authors’ identities are concealed from reviewers.

  • Reviewers’ identities are concealed from authors.

This system ensures objectivity, scientific quality, and avoids conflicts of interest.

2. Review Workflow

a. Submission of Article

Authors submit manuscripts through the online submission system.
The editor conducts an initial screening regarding:

  • alignment with the journal’s focus and scope,

  • formatting compliance,

  • completeness of files,

  • potential plagiarism.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening proceed to the review stage.

b. Editor Screening (Desk Evaluation)

The editor determines whether the manuscript:

  • is suitable to be sent to reviewers, or

  • should be rejected due to mismatch with focus and scope, low quality, or high plagiarism.

c. Assignment to Reviewers

Manuscripts passing the desk evaluation are sent to two reviewers according to their expertise.
Reviewers are given 2–4 weeks to complete the assessment.

d. Review Process

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • originality,

  • methodological accuracy,

  • theoretical relevance,

  • analytical depth,

  • quality of discussion and conclusion,

  • scientific contribution,

  • formatting compliance.

Reviewer recommendations:

  1. Accept

  2. Minor Revision

  3. Major Revision

  4. Reject

Reviewers also provide constructive feedback for improvement.

e. Revision Stage

If revisions are required:

  • Authors must revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments.

  • Authors must upload a Response to Reviewer explaining each revision made.

f. Editorial Decision

The editor reviews:

  • reviewer reports,

  • author revisions,

  • scientific quality of the manuscript.

The editor may decide:

  • accepted,

  • requires additional revision,

  • rejected.

g. Final Editing & Publication

Accepted manuscripts undergo:

  • language editing,

  • layouting,

  • proofreading,

  • final galley preparation.

After finalization, the article is published in the upcoming journal issue.

3. Reviewer Ethical Principles

Reviewers are required to:

  • maintain manuscript confidentiality,

  • evaluate objectively and scientifically,

  • avoid conflicts of interest,

  • provide clear and constructive feedback,

  • complete reviews within the given timeline.

4. Handling Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline the review task if they have conflicts of interest, such as:

  • close professional relationship with the author,

  • research collaboration,

  • same institutional affiliation.

5. Final Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on acceptance based on:

  • reviewer recommendations,

  • academic considerations,

  • journal quality standards.