Peer Review Process

Jurnal Etika dan Pemilu applies a systematic and transparent peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of all manuscripts published in the journal.

All submitted manuscripts undergo the following stages:

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the journal's online submission system. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript complies with the journal's focus and scope, author guidelines, ethical standards, and formatting requirements.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

After submission, the Editor conducts an initial assessment of the manuscript. At this stage, the manuscript is evaluated based on:

  • Relevance to the journal's focus and scope;

  • Compliance with the author guidelines;

  • Completeness of the manuscript;

  • Academic quality and clarity of presentation;

  • Originality and contribution of the study;

  • Compliance with publication ethics; and

  • Similarity or plagiarism screening, when applicable.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be rejected at this stage without being sent for external peer review.

Manuscripts that meet the initial editorial requirements will proceed to the peer-review stage.

3. Assignment of Reviewers

The Editor assigns qualified reviewers who have expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

Jurnal Etika dan Pemilu applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

Reviewers must be independent and should not have any conflict of interest that may affect the objectivity of the review process.

4. Peer-Review Evaluation

Reviewers are requested to evaluate the manuscript objectively and constructively. The review may include assessment of:

  • Originality and significance of the manuscript;

  • Relevance to the journal's scope;

  • Clarity of research objectives or research questions;

  • Appropriateness of the research methodology;

  • Accuracy and adequacy of data analysis;

  • Quality of the results and discussion;

  • Consistency between findings and conclusions;

  • Contribution to the field of ethics, elections, democracy, governance, or related areas;

  • Adequacy and relevance of references;

  • Academic writing quality; and

  • Compliance with research and publication ethics.

Reviewers are expected to provide clear comments, suggestions, and recommendations that may assist the authors in improving the quality of the manuscript.

5. Reviewer Recommendation

After reviewing the manuscript, reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:

  1. Accept Submission – the manuscript is suitable for publication without substantial revision;

  2. Revisions Required – the manuscript requires minor revisions before it can be accepted;

  3. Resubmit for Review – the manuscript requires substantial or major revisions and must undergo another review process;

  4. Decline Submission – the manuscript does not meet the journal's academic or publication standards.

The reviewers' recommendations serve as important considerations for the Editor but do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

6. Editorial Decision

The Editor evaluates the reviewers' comments and recommendations and makes an editorial decision regarding the manuscript.

The final decision may be:

  • Accepted;

  • Minor revision;

  • Major revision;

  • Resubmission for review; or

  • Rejected.

The Editor has the authority and responsibility to make the final decision based on the academic quality of the manuscript, reviewers' recommendations, relevance to the journal, ethical considerations, and compliance with editorial standards.

7. Manuscript Revision

When revisions are requested, the authors must revise the manuscript according to the reviewers' and Editor's comments.

Authors are encouraged to provide a clear response to each comment and indicate the changes made in the revised manuscript. If an author disagrees with a reviewer recommendation, the author should provide a reasonable academic explanation.

Revised manuscripts must be submitted within the period specified by the Editorial Office.

8. Re-Review Process

Manuscripts requiring major revisions may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to other reviewers for further evaluation.

The reviewers will assess whether the authors have adequately addressed the comments and whether the revised manuscript meets the journal's publication standards.

More than one round of revision may be required when necessary.

9. Final Acceptance

A manuscript will be formally accepted for publication only after:

  • The peer-review process has been satisfactorily completed;

  • All required revisions have been adequately addressed;

  • The manuscript meets the journal's academic and ethical standards; and

  • The Editor has issued the final acceptance decision.

Acceptance of a manuscript does not guarantee immediate publication in a specific issue. Publication scheduling is determined by the Editorial Board according to the journal's publication plan.

10. Copyediting and Proofreading

After acceptance, the manuscript proceeds to the copyediting, formatting, and proofreading stages.

Authors may be requested to review the final proof to ensure that there are no substantive errors before publication. At this stage, substantial changes to the content of the accepted manuscript are generally not permitted unless approved by the Editor.

11. Publication

After the editorial production process has been completed, the article will be published in an issue of Jurnal Etika dan Pemilu and made available through the journal's official website.

12. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are treated as confidential documents.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to unauthorized parties. Reviewers must not use unpublished materials, data, arguments, or interpretations contained in a manuscript for personal or professional advantage.

13. Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest related to the authors, institutions, research topics, or funding sources associated with a manuscript.

When a conflict of interest exists, the Editor or reviewer concerned must withdraw from handling or evaluating the manuscript.

14. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently and are based solely on academic merit, originality, relevance, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and the manuscript's contribution to the field.

Decisions are not influenced by the authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, political views, professional position, or other personal characteristics.

15. Peer-Review Integrity

Jurnal Etika dan Pemilu is committed to maintaining the integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and independence of the peer-review process. Any indication of manipulation of peer review, fabricated reviewer identities, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other unethical practices will be investigated in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policy.