Peer Review

This journal uses double-blind peer review, which means that the reviewers won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the reviewer's identity. The idea is that everyone should get a similar and unbiased review.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

If Journal’s Editor has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following items:

  • Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their research;
  • Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary;
  • Providing all required information within established deadlines;
  • Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal;
  • Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest concerning the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review;
  • Reporting possible research misconducts;
  • Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons;
  • Treating the manuscript as a confidential document;
  • Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript;
  • Not communicating directly with authors if somehow they identify the authors;
  • Not identifying themselves as authors;
  • Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer;
  • Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original research;
  • Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge;
  • Writing a review report in English only;
  • Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript.

What should be checked while reviewing a manuscript?

  • Novelty;
  • Originality;
  • Scientific reliability;
  • A valuable contribution to science;
  • Adding new aspects to the existing field of study;
  • Ethical aspects;
  • Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines;
  • References provided to substantiate the content;
  • Grammar, punctuation, and spelling;
  • Scientific misconduct.

Peer Review Process

The detailed peer-review process can be seen in Figure 1. 

Submitted papers are evaluated by anonymous referees by double-blind peer review for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation. The Editor shall inform you of the results of the review as soon as possible. The peer-review process can be seen in Figure 1.

The process can be described as follows.

1. The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated whether it is suitable for the Jurnal Teknik Elektro Komputer dan Informatika focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similarity score by using Turnitin. The decision is rejected or accepted for a review process.

2. The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Double Blind Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.

3. Afterward, the editorial team meeting suggested the final decision on the revised manuscript by the authors.

4. Finally, the Editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author.

5. The accepted manuscript then continued to the copyediting and layout editing process to prepare the camera-ready paper.

Review Outcomes

Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. Decisions categories include:

  • Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to this journal.
  • Accept with Major Revision - Manuscript will be reviewed again after some major modifications are made.
  • Accept with Minor Revisions - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in this journal under the condition that minor modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
  • Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.

 

Figure 1. Peer Review Process