At Jurnal Andalas: Rekayasa dan Penerapan Teknologi (JARPeT), we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic rigor and integrity through a thorough and transparent peer-review process. Each manuscript undergoes a structured evaluation to ensure the quality, originality, and contribution of the work to the broader academic and professional community.

1. Initial Manuscript Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an appointed editorial board member to determine its alignment with the journal’s focus and scope. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards or fall outside its scope may be rejected at this stage, without external review. Manuscripts that meet the initial criteria are sent for peer review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

JARPeT employs a double-blind peer-review process, where both the authors and the reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review. This ensures impartiality and fairness, as reviewers assess the manuscript solely on its scholarly merit. Each manuscript is typically reviewed by two or more independent experts in the relevant field.

3. Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the subject area of the manuscript. They are tasked with evaluating the manuscript based on several key criteria:

• Originality: The manuscript should offer new insights, approaches, or findings that contribute to the field.
• Methodological Soundness: The research design, data collection, and analysis must be appropriate, rigorous, and clearly articulated.
• Clarity and Coherence: The manuscript should be clearly written and logically organized, with the findings supporting the conclusions.
• Contribution to the Field: The manuscript should advance knowledge in its specific area of study and have practical or theoretical relevance.
• Appropriate Referencing: Proper citation of previous work and accurate referencing are essential for maintaining academic integrity.

Reviewers are not responsible for correcting grammatical or typographical errors, although they may suggest revisions to improve the manuscript’s readability.

4. Reviewers’ Recommendations

Reviewers submit a detailed report along with one of the following recommendations:

• Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication with no or minor revisions.
• Revisions Required: The manuscript requires specific revisions before it can be reconsidered for publication.
• Resubmit for Review: The manuscript needs substantial revisions and will undergo another round of review after resubmission.
• Resubmit Elsewhere: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s criteria but may be suitable for another publication.
• Decline Submission: The manuscript is not suitable for publication in JARPeT.

5. Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the editorial board and based on the reviewers' reports, makes the final decision regarding the manuscript. The possible decisions are:

• Accept: The manuscript is accepted as it is or with minor revisions.
• Minor or Major Revisions: The manuscript is returned to the author(s) with feedback for revisions. The revised manuscript is typically reviewed by the editor and may be returned to reviewers if necessary.
• Reject: The manuscript is declined for publication.

6. Revision and Resubmission

If revisions are required, the authors are given the opportunity to address the reviewers’ comments and resubmit the manuscript within a specified period. For minor revisions, the Editor may review the changes to ensure they meet the journal’s standards. For major revisions, the manuscript may undergo another round of peer review with the original reviewers or new experts, depending on the extent of the revisions.

7. Final Acceptance

Once the manuscript meets the necessary standards following revisions, it is accepted for publication. The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, and authors are notified accordingly.

8. Post-Review and Publication

Upon acceptance, the manuscript enters the production phase, where it is formatted, proofread, and prepared for publication. The date of acceptance is published along with the article. Authors are given the opportunity to review the proofs before the final publication.

Reviewer Acknowledgment

JARPeT recognizes the essential role that reviewers play in the publication process. Reviewers’ contributions are formally acknowledged, and they are listed on the journal’s website. Additionally, reviewers may cite their work for JARPeT as part of their professional development.