Peer Review Process
Publication of articles in Jurnal Andalas: Rekayasa dan Penerapan Teknologi (JARPeT) is dependent solely on scientific validity and coherence as judged by our editors and/or peer reviewers, who will also assess whether the writing is comprehensible and whether the work represents a useful contribution to the field. JARPeT acknowledged the effort and suggestions made by its reviewers.
Initial evaluation of manuscripts
The Editor will first evaluate all manuscripts submitted. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the scope of JARPeT. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review. At this stage, editors will check for possible similarities in submitted articles compared to other periodicals, journals, and conference proceedings previously published. The tool used is Turnitin similarity checker.
Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two to three experts who will be asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, whether it duplicates the already published works, and whether or not the manuscript is sufficiently clear for publication.
Review process of the manuscript at JARPeT is conducted using double blind review process i.e. authors do not know the reviewers of their paper and reviewers do not know the author(s) of the manuscript that they review.
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:
- Is original by stating the objectives and gap clearly
- Is methodologically sound
- Has results/findings which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
- Correctly references previous relevant work
- Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.
Reviewers advise the editor about the submission recommendation from among the following options: Accept, Revisions Required, Resubmit for Review, Resubmit Elsewhere and Decline Submission. The Editors will reach a decision based on these reports and, where necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board. Editor’s decision is final. The differences between revision required option and resubmit for review option is after revised paper upload by the author, the further review is only carried out by the editor for the option of revision required. While for option of resubmit for review, next round review will be carry out by the previous reviewers.
Becoming a Reviewer
If you are not currently a reviewer for JARPeT, but would like to be added to the list of reviewers, please contact us. The benefits of reviewing for JARPeT include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in related research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in our list of reviewers. You may also be able to cite your work for JARPeT as part of your professional development requirements.