PEER REVIEW PROCESS

 

Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Bidang Sosial dan Humaniora, abbreviated as ABDISOSHUM, uses a double blind peer review model. Reviewers do not know the identities of the authors, and authors do not know the identities of the reviewers. Each manuscript is assessed by at least two independent experts, who evaluate its scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the Focus and Scope of the journal.

1. Peer Review at a Glance

Item Details
Review model Double blind peer review
Reviewers per manuscript At least two independent reviewers
Similarity check The editors check similarity with Turnitin. Authors are encouraged to check similarity before submission.
Final decision The editors, on the basis of the reviewers' comments. The Editor in Chief makes the final decision.
Effect of fees None. Fees do not affect editorial decisions (see Author Fees).

2. Stages and Typical Timing

Every manuscript follows the stages below. The times are targets and not guarantees. For the estimated time from submission to notification, see Publication Frequency.

Step Stage What happens Typical time
1 Initial evaluation The editors check scope, format, citation style, originality, and ethics. Varies
2 Reviewer assignment At least two independent reviewers are invited. Aimed within 2 weeks
3 Review Reviewers assess the manuscript and recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection. About 2 weeks
4 Decision The editors decide on the basis of the reviews. The Editor in Chief makes the final decision. Varies
5 Revision The author revises the manuscript and answers each comment. 2 weeks (minor) or 4 weeks (major)
6 Publication The accepted manuscript is copyedited, formatted, and assigned to a forthcoming issue. Next available issue

3. Initial Evaluation

The editors first check whether a manuscript meets the basic requirements for review. A submission must follow the Focus and Scope and the Author Guidelines, show scientific merit or novelty, and be free from plagiarism.

  • Format. A manuscript that does not follow the Manuscript Preparation instructions is returned to the author for reformatting and resubmission.
  • Similarity. The editors check similarity with Turnitin. A manuscript with a high similarity score is examined by the editors, as described in the Plagiarism Policy.
  • Participants. For an article that involves community participants, the editors check that consent and permission statements are provided.

4. Reviewer Assignment and Review

At least two independent reviewers are invited for each manuscript, and the aim is to complete the assignment within two weeks. Reviewers should come from institutions that are different from the institution of the corresponding author. Names, affiliations, acknowledgements, and contribution statements are removed before the manuscript is sent for review, so that the review remains double blind. Reviewers usually complete the review in about two weeks and give comments that help the authors improve the manuscript.

Level of assessment What reviewers consider
The manuscript as a whole Scientific merit or novelty, originality, and relevance to the focus and scope of the journal, which covers community service in the social sciences and humanities
Each section of the article template Title and abstract, introduction, method, results and discussion, conclusion, references, and ethics and integrity

5. Editorial Decisions

The editors make the decision on the basis of the reviewers' comments, and the Editor in Chief makes the final decision. If the comments of the reviewers differ significantly, an additional reviewer may be invited. Fees do not affect the decision.

Decision Meaning Time for the author
Accept The manuscript is accepted for publication. Not applicable
Minor revision The manuscript needs small changes before it can be accepted. 2 weeks
Major revision The manuscript needs substantial changes before it can be considered again. 4 weeks
Reject The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal. Not applicable

6. Revision and Resubmission

Authors who are asked to revise a manuscript resubmit it together with a rebuttal letter that answers each comment of the reviewers and shows where the manuscript was changed. The changes should be clearly marked in the revised manuscript. A manuscript with a major revision normally returns to the same reviewers. A manuscript with a minor revision may be checked again by the reviewers, but this is optional.

7. Order of Publication

The Editor in Chief determines the order in which accepted manuscripts are published. The Editor in Chief considers the date of acceptance, the geographic distribution of the authors, and the theme of the issue. Issues appear in March, June, September, and December, as described on the Publication Frequency page.

8. Conflicts of Interest, Confidentiality, and Generative AI

Topic Rule
Conflicts of interest A reviewer or an editor who has a conflict of interest must decline or withdraw from the manuscript. A manuscript that is submitted by an editor or by a member of the editorial board is handled by an editor who is not involved in it, as described in the Conflicts of Interest policy.
Confidentiality Information about a manuscript is confidential. Reviewers and editors must not share it or use it for their own benefit.
Generative AI Reviewers must not upload a manuscript to a generative AI tool. They may use such a tool only to improve the language of their own review report. See the Generative AI Policies.

9. Appeals and Allegations of Misconduct

An author may appeal a decision once, by sending an email to the editorial office at jurnal.abdisoshum@gmail.com with the subject line Appeal: [Manuscript Identifier] and with the evidence that supports the appeal. An editor who is not involved in the manuscript reviews the appeal, and the resulting decision is final. Disagreement with a decision is not by itself a ground for reconsideration. Concerns about research integrity are handled under the Allegations of Misconduct policy.

Related Pages

More information is available on the Reviewer Board page and on the Editorial Board page. Experts who would like to review for the journal can use the Call for Reviewer form.