Peer Review Process

Editorial & Peer Review Process

All papers submitted to JURNALISTRENDI must comply with the journal’s focus and scope, author guidelines, and the official templates provided by the editorial team. Manuscripts must demonstrate clear scientific contribution or novelty that aligns with the journal’s disciplinary coverage.

Submission Requirements

Manuscripts may be returned to the authors without further evaluation if they fail to meet submission requirements, are not formatted correctly, or cannot be accessed or downloaded properly.

  1. Originality and Independence
    Submitted manuscripts must be original and independent work of the author(s). The editor may reject manuscripts without external review if they are insufficient in quality, exceed the journal’s word limit, are improperly formatted, poorly presented, or lack clarity.
  2. Initial Editorial Assessment
    Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be handled by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor. At this stage, the manuscript is evaluated for its scholarly contribution, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and overall presentation quality.

Peer Review Policy

After passing the pre-evaluation stage, the manuscript will be reviewed by two independent peer reviewers. JURNALISTRENDI applies a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed.

Reviewers’ comments and recommendations serve as the primary basis for editorial decisions and will be communicated to the authors for revision and improvement where necessary.

Revision, Confidentiality, and Timeline

  1. All submitted manuscripts are subject to peer review. If revisions are required, the corresponding author must submit the revised manuscript within the timeframe specified in the editorial decision email.
  2. The peer review process generally takes 2–10 weeks for regular article submissions, calculated from the time the manuscript enters the review stage.
  3. The journal ensures that all manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents prior to publication, in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics.
  4. Final publication decisions are made by the editor based on peer reviewers’ recommendations and editorial judgment.

Editorial Decisions

Upon completion of the peer review process, the corresponding author will receive an editorial decision via email. The editor will determine the suitability of the manuscript for publication by issuing one of the following decisions:

  1. Resubmit for Review
    The manuscript requires substantial revision and must undergo a new round of peer review.
  2. Revision Required (Minor or Major)
    The manuscript may proceed after the required revisions have been completed and evaluated in accordance with the editor’s instructions.
  3. Rejected
    The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication in JURNALISTRENDI.
  4. Accepted (Without Revision)
    The manuscript is accepted for publication as submitted.

Detailed explanations of each decision category are provided in the Author Guidelines.