Accredited Peringkat 3 (SINTA 3) by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia, SK No. 10/C/C3/DT.05.00/2025 (21 March 2025), valid from Vol. 5 No. 2 (2023) to Vol. 10 No. 1 (2028).
Peer Review Process
IJIP (Indonesian Journal of Islamic Psychology) uses double-blind peer review: reviewers do not know the identity of the authors, and authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. The process follows the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
1. Stages
- Initial screening. The editor checks that the manuscript fits the Focus and Scope, follows the Author Guidelines, is complete and anonymised, and passes the similarity check (see Screening for Plagiarism). Manuscripts that fail are returned to the authors or declined without review.
- Peer review. The editor invites at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the topic.
- Editorial decision. The handling editor decides on the basis of the reviewers' reports: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. When reports disagree, the editor may invite an additional reviewer.
- Revision. Authors revise the manuscript and reply to every comment in a response table. The revised manuscript is checked by the editor and, after major revisions, by the reviewers again. Further rounds may follow.
- Acceptance and production. After acceptance the manuscript is copyedited and typeset, and the authors approve the proofs before publication.
2. Review criteria
Reviewers assess fit with the journal's scope; originality and contribution (state of the art, research gap, objectives); soundness of the research design, data and analysis; depth of the discussion and comparison with previous studies; whether the conclusions answer the objectives and are supported by the results; quality and currency of the references; and clarity of the writing, tables and figures.
3. Reviewers
Reviewers hold a doctoral degree and/or are recognised experts in the field, with a publication record in reputable journals in the last three years. They must not have co-authored with the authors in the last five years, must not be affiliated with the same institution as the authors, and must declare any conflict of interest. Members of the editorial board do not review manuscripts they handle as editors.
4. Confidentiality and use of AI
Manuscripts under review are confidential. Reviewers must not use artificial intelligence tools to analyse, assess or write comments on a manuscript, and must not upload any part of a manuscript to an AI application. See the AI Policy.
5. Decisions and appeals
Editorial decisions are based only on academic merit, independent of the publisher and sponsors. Authors may appeal a decision once by writing to the editor with their reasons; the appeal is handled by an editor not involved in the original decision.
