Peer Review Policy

Jurnal Sosiologi Agama Indonesia (JSAI) applies a double-anonymized peer-review process. The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers, and the identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors during the evaluation process.

Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject or methodological expertise. Peer review assists the editors in assessing the manuscript’s originality, academic contribution, theoretical foundation, methodological rigor, evidential adequacy, analytical quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.

Editorial and Review Stages

No. Stage Assessment
1 Administrative Check Completeness of submission, author information, anonymized manuscript, required declarations, file format, and compliance with technical requirements.
2 Editorial Screening Fit with the aims and scope, originality, academic contribution, methodology, ethical compliance, language, reference quality, and general publication readiness.
3 Similarity Screening Evaluation of textual similarity, attribution, quotation, duplicate publication, and possible plagiarism. Similarity percentages are interpreted contextually and are not used as the sole basis for a decision.
4 External Peer Review Independent evaluation by normally two reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript.
5 Author Revision Authors revise the manuscript and submit a point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.
6 Editorial Reassessment The revised manuscript may be evaluated by the editor, returned to the original reviewers, or sent to another reviewer where necessary. When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the assigned editor will assess the reasoning and evidence contained in the reports rather than determine the outcome through a numerical vote. The editor may request clarification, seek an additional independent review, or make a reasoned editorial decision based on the manuscript, the available reports, and the journal’s academic and ethical standards.
7 Final Decision The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor makes the final decision based on the manuscript, review reports, author response, ethical considerations, and journal policy.
8 Production Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, reference and metadata verification, layout, proofreading, author proof approval, and online publication.

Possible Editorial Decisions

  • Accept: the manuscript is suitable for publication, subject to final technical and production checks.
  • Minor Revision: the manuscript requires limited revisions that do not fundamentally change its research design, argument, or findings.
  • Major Revision: the manuscript requires substantial revision to its theoretical framework, method, analysis, discussion, presentation, or documentation.
  • Resubmit for Review: the manuscript may be reconsidered after extensive reconstruction and will undergo a new evaluation.
  • Decline: the manuscript is unsuitable for publication because of scope, originality, methodological, ethical, evidential, analytical, or presentation problems that cannot be adequately resolved through ordinary revision.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected on the basis of subject expertise, methodological competence, publication record, independence, availability, and absence of relevant conflicts of interest. The journal seeks reviewers whose expertise corresponds directly to the manuscript’s topic and research design.

Reviewers should not be assigned when they have a recent collaborative, supervisory, institutional, financial, personal, or competitive relationship with an author that could reasonably affect—or appear to affect—their judgment.

Reviewers and editors must not require authors to cite publications that are irrelevant to the manuscript. Suggested references must be academically necessary and directly related to the argument, theory, method, evidence, or scholarly context of the study. Requests intended primarily to increase citations to a reviewer, editor, institution, or journal are prohibited.

Confidentiality

Submitted manuscripts, review reports, editorial correspondence, author responses, and unpublished supporting materials are confidential. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, distribute, quote, upload, or use manuscript content for personal advantage or research purposes without authorization.

Editorial Submissions

A manuscript submitted by an editor, editorial-board member, reviewer, or person closely connected to the journal must undergo the same editorial and peer-review standards as other submissions. The person concerned must have no access to reviewer identities, review reports, editorial deliberations, or the final decision process. An independent editor must manage the manuscript.

Review Time

The journal seeks to complete editorial screening and peer review within a reasonable period. Review duration may vary according to manuscript complexity, reviewer availability, revision quality, ethical inquiries, and the number of review rounds required.

Any estimated processing time is indicative and does not constitute a guarantee of acceptance or publication. JSAI does not offer paid or guaranteed expedited peer review.

Final Editorial Authority

Reviewers provide expert recommendations, but they do not make the final publication decision. Final responsibility rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor, who must consider the quality of the manuscript, the review evidence, the authors’ revisions, applicable ethical standards, and the interests of the scholarly record.