Peer Review Proccess
Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI) is a double-blind and peer-reviewed national journal. Each paper submitted to BERAJAH JOURNAL for publication is subject to peer review. Peer review in this journal is an evaluation of papers submitted by two or more individuals with the same competence as the author. It aims to determine the suitability of academic manuscripts for publication. The peer review method is used to maintain quality standards and give credibility to the paper. The peer review in Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI) takes place in 9 steps with the following description.
Corresponding authors or submitting papers to journals. This is done through an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). However, to make it easier for writers, Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI) also temporarily accepts paper submissions via email.
Editorial Office Rating
Papers submitted are first rated by the editor of Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI). The editor checks if it matches the focus and scope of the Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI). The composition and arrangement of the paper is evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to ensure it includes the required sections and styles. In addition, an assessment of the minimum quality required of a paper for publication begins at this step, including one that assesses whether there are major methodological defects. Any submitted papers that pass this step will be checked by Ithenticate to identify plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.
Editor-in-Chief Assessment (EIC)
The Editor in Chief (EIC) checks whether the paper is suitable for the journal, is original, interesting and significant enough for publication. Otherwise, the paper may be rejected without further review
Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes will be appropriate reviewers (also known as referees) based on expertise, proximity of research interests, and no consideration of conflicts of interest. The peer review process at Jurnal Perbankan Syariah Indonesia (JPSI) engages a community of experts in the biomedical sciences, clinical medicine, community medicine, social medicine, and narrowly defined medical education, who are qualified and able to conduct a fairly impartial review. Impartiality is also maintained by the double-blind peer review used in this journal. That said, the reviewer does not know the identity of the author, otherwise the author does not know the identity of the reviewer. This paper was submitted to two reviewers anonymously.
Response to Invitation
Prospective reviewers consider the invitation based on their own expertise, conflict of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or reject. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for suggestions from an alternative reviewer, when he or she refuses to review.
The reviewer allocates time to read the paper several times. The first reading is used to form the initial impression of the work. If major problems are discovered at this stage, reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper a few more times, taking notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. Reviews are then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or with a request for revision (usually marked as major or minor) before reconsideration.
Journal Evaluating Reviews
EIC and handling editors consider all returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ markedly between the two reviewers, the handling editor may invite additional reviewers for additional opinions before making a decision.
The editor emails the decision to the author including relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take necessary action and response. At this point, reviewers are also sent an email or letter notifying them of the results of their review.
If accepted , the paper is sent to production. If an article is rejected or sent back to the author for major or minor revisions, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewer to help the author improve the article. Authors must make corrections and revise the paper in accordance with reviewers' comments and instructions.
After the revision is made, the author must send the revised paper back to the editor equipped with a cover page containing a checklist stating the points of correction and revisions that have been made.
If a paper is sent back for revision , reviewers should expect to receive the revised version, unless they have chosen not to participate further. However, if only minor changes are requested, this follow-up review can be performed by the handling editor.
If the editor is happy with the revised paper, it is considered accepted. Accepted papers will be published online and are all freely available as downloadable pdf files.