Review Process

Review Model

DECODING Jurnal Mahasiswa KPI uses double-blind external peer review for research manuscripts. Each research article accepted for publication must have received substantive assessments from at least two independent external reviewers.

1. IDENTITY MASKING

Reviewers are not provided with author identities, and authors are not provided with reviewer identities. Editors and authorised editorial staff may access identifying information for administration, conflict checks, and editorial communication.

Authors must prepare anonymised review files and a separate identified title page as specified in Submission Requirements. Public preprints or distinctive research contexts may make identities discoverable; complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed. Reviewers who recognise an author must inform the handling editor and disclose any resulting conflict.

2. SCOPE OF EXTERNAL REVIEW

The review model applies to research manuscripts using empirical, theoretical, conceptual, or interpretive approaches. Humanities-oriented research is not exempt from the external-review requirement of DECODING Jurnal Mahasiswa KPI.

Materials integral to the research claims, including relevant supplementary materials, are made available for assessment subject to legitimate confidentiality and access restrictions. Restrictions must be disclosed to the editor.

Manuscripts may be rejected at editorial screening without external review. Receipt of two reports does not guarantee acceptance; decision arrangements are described in Decision Process.

3. SPECIAL ISSUES AND ASSOCIATED AUTHORS

Research in special issues or guest-edited collections follows the same external-review model as regular research articles. Special-issue content is clearly identified, and the Editor-in-Chief retains overall editorial oversight.

Submissions by editors, board members, guest editors, or others closely associated with the journal receive the same review standard. Independent handling and conflict safeguards follow Editorial Roles and Editorial Independence.

4. NON-RESEARCH CONTENT AND REVIEW RECORDS

Editorial notices, corrections, retraction notices, and other non-research journal communications may receive editorial assessment rather than external peer review. Their document type and any departure from the standard research-review model must be clear.

Reviewer reports and identities are not routinely published with articles. Published articles display submission, acceptance, and publication dates. Access to review records is governed by Confidentiality.

Related Information: Reviewer Selection explains who may review; Reviewer Guidelines defines assessment standards; Decision Process describes editorial outcomes and communication.

Contact

For enquiries about the review process, contact [email protected]