PeerReviewProcess

Peer Review Process

Usriyyāt: Indonesian Journal of Islamic Family Law adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure objectivity, scholarly thoroughness, and ethical integrity. The process is also designed to be efficient and transparent throughout the editorial workflow. All submitted manuscripts pass through the following stages before publication.

Stages of the Peer Review Process

1. Initial Assessment by the Editor-in-Chief

Upon manuscript submission through the OJS system, the Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment. The purpose is to ensure the manuscript aligns with Usriyyāt's focus and scope. Manuscripts that are clearly irrelevant are immediately returned to the author with a brief explanation.

2. Technical and Similarity Check

If the manuscript is deemed suitable, the Editor-in-Chief forwards it to the Managing Editor. The Managing Editor checks administrative completeness, formatting compliance with the author guidelines, and performs a similarity check using plagiarism detection software (Turnitin). Manuscripts exceeding the journal’s similarity threshold will be returned to the author for revision or rejected.

3. Assignment to a Handling Editor

Manuscripts that pass the technical screening and similarity check are assigned to a Section Editor from the Editorial Board. This editor is responsible for overseeing the academic review process through to the final decision.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

The Handling Editor invites at least two independent reviewers who are recognized experts in international Islamic family law or the specific topic of the manuscript. The review process is strictly double-blind: the authors' identities are concealed from the reviewers, and the reviewers' identities are concealed from the authors. This guarantees an impartial evaluation based solely on the scholarly quality of the content.

During this stage, the manuscript status in the OJS system changes to “Under Review.”

5. Receipt of Reviews and Editorial Decision

Once all reviewer reports are received, the manuscript status changes to “Required Reviews Complete.” The Handling Editor then evaluates all comments and recommendations and makes an initial decision. The decision options are as follows:

  • Accept Submission: The manuscript meets the journal's scholarly standards and is ready for publication.
  • Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires minor improvements; the author revises without another round of external review.
  • Major Revisions: The manuscript requires substantial revision; after revision, it will be sent back to the reviewers for further evaluation.
  • Decline Submission: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or falls outside its scope.

6. Author Revision

If revisions are requested, the author is given adequate time to improve the manuscript according to the editor's guidance and the reviewers' comments. The author then resubmits the revised manuscript along with a point-by-point response letter addressing each comment.

7. Evaluation of Revised Manuscript

The Handling Editor assesses whether the revisions adequately address all feedback. If deemed necessary, the manuscript may be returned to the reviewers for an additional round of review, particularly in the case of major revisions. This cycle continues until the editor is satisfied that the manuscript meets the required standards.

8. Final Decision and Publication

Once the manuscript is finally accepted, it proceeds to copyediting, layout preparation, and galley proofing. The final decision on acceptance and the order of publication is determined by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account scholarly merit, date of acceptance, and geographical distribution to ensure content diversity.

Summary of the Review Workflow

  1. Author submits the manuscript.
  2. Initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief (scope and relevance).
  3. Technical check and plagiarism screening by the Managing Editor.
  4. Assignment to a Handling Editor.
  5. Double-blind peer review by at least two reviewers.
  6. Editor’s decision based on reviewer reports.
  7. Author revision (if required).
  8. Evaluation of revisions; additional review round if necessary.
  9. Final decision, copyediting, layout, and publication.

Processing Time: On average, the entire process from manuscript submission to publication takes approximately 12 weeks, depending significantly on the responsiveness of reviewers and authors. Editors actively monitor progress to ensure a timely process.

Confidentiality: In accordance with publication ethics, all manuscripts under review are treated as strictly confidential documents. Information regarding a manuscript shall not be disclosed to any party outside the editorial board, reviewers, and the corresponding author until the manuscript is accepted and published.

PEER REVIEW DIAGRAM

  • Submission fees
  • Article processing charges (APCs)
  • Publication fees

All editorial services-peer review, copyediting, layout, and final publication-are currently provided free of charge. This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted and accepted until further notice. Should there be any future changes to this policy, an official announcement will be made through the journal’s website and will apply only to manuscripts submitted after the date of such announcement.