PEER REVIEW PROCESS

1. INTRODUCTION
Indonesian Journal of Guidance and Counseling Studies (IJGCS) employs a double-blind peer-review process. Every article submitted for publication in IJGCS undergoes this process, which is designed to uphold quality standards and ensure the credibility of the published articles. In the double-blind peer review process, the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review. This process ensures impartiality and objectivity in the assessment of manuscripts.

IJGCS adheres to the guidelines and best practices set forth by the following policies:

2. POLICY DETAIL

  • Mandate for Peer Review: All scholarly contributions submitted to IJGCS, including research articles, technical papers, conceptual papers, and case study reports, undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process before any decision regarding publication is made. Certain submission types, such as editorials, invited commentaries, or book reviews, may undergo a different editorial assessment process, which will be clearly communicated.
  • Peer Review Model: IJGCS exclusively uses a double-blind peer review model for all eligible submissions.
  • Selection of Reviewers:
    • Reviewers are selected by the handling editor based on their demonstrable expertise in the manuscript's subject area, their scholarly reputation, their availability, and their ability to provide an objective, critical, and constructive assessment.
    • Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest with the authors or the research before agreeing to review and must decline if a significant conflict exists.
    • IJGCS typically aims to obtain at least two independent peer review reports for each manuscript undergoing full review.
  • Confidentiality in Peer Review:
    • All manuscript materials, including the manuscript itself, reviewer reports, and all related correspondence, are treated as strictly confidential by editors, reviewers, and journal staff.
    • Reviewers must not disclose any information about the manuscript or its review to any third party without prior permission from the journal.
    • Information obtained during the peer review process must not be used for the reviewer's personal advantage or to disadvantage or discredit others.
  • Objectivity, Constructiveness, and Timeliness:
    • Reviewers are expected to conduct their reviews objectively and provide unbiased, specific, and constructive feedback aimed at improving the manuscript.
    • All comments should be professional and courteous, focusing on the scholarly content rather than making personal criticisms of the authors.
    • Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the timeframe stipulated by the journal to ensure timely feedback to authors.
  • Copyright of Review Reports:
    • Peer reviewers who submit review reports to IJGCS retain the copyright of their review reports.
    • IJGCS will treat review reports as confidential communications. Anonymized review reports will be shared with the authors of the manuscript. IJGCS will not publish reviewer reports or disclose reviewers' identities to authors or third parties without obtaining explicit permission from the respective reviewers, except as required by legal processes or in investigations of misconduct.
  • Editorial Decision-Making:
    • The final decision regarding manuscript publication (acceptance, rejection, or request for revision) rests with the Editor-in-Chief or a designated handling editor. This decision is based on the evaluation of reviewer reports, the editor's own assessment of the manuscript's quality and suitability for IJGCS, and its adherence to the journal's scope and ethical standards.
    • Editorial decisions are made independently and are based solely on the scholarly merit of the work.
    • Based on the peer reviewers' comments and recommendations, the Editor will make one of the following decisions. The peer review process typically takes between 2 to 10 weeks. The possible decisions are as follows:
    • Accept (Accept Submission): The manuscript is accepted in its current form with no further changes required. The editorial team will notify the author, who must submit the final version of the manuscript within 1–2 weeks. Failure to submit the final version on time or failure to inform the editorial board of any delays may result in the manuscript being withdrawn from publication.
    • Accept with Revisions (Revision Required): The manuscript is accepted, but minor or major revisions are needed. The author must revise the manuscript accordingly. The revised version will be evaluated by the editor and, if necessary, sent back to reviewers to ensure all required changes have been satisfactorily addressed before final acceptance.
    • Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and must be resubmitted as a new submission. If resubmitted, it will undergo a full second round of peer review.
    • Reject: The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication in the journal and is rejected outright. Authors will not be given the opportunity to submit a revised version.
  • Appeals Process:
    • Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe there has been a significant misunderstanding, a procedural flaw, or evidence of bias in the review process, as detailed in IJGCS's "Policy. Authors can contact the IJGCS editorial office via email or contact the journal's editorial board.
  • Guidance and Ethical Conduct for Reviewers:
    • IJGCS provides clear guidelines to its peer reviewers regarding their role, responsibilities, how to conduct a review, and ethical expectations, drawing from the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
    • Reviewers are expected to adhere to these ethical guidelines, including maintaining confidentiality, declaring conflicts of interest, and reporting any suspected misconduct.
  • Management of the Peer Review Process:
    • IJGCS employs a robust online editorial management system to ensure an efficient, fair, and transparent peer review process. This system helps track manuscript progress, manage reviewer assignments, and maintain records.

3. TECHNICALITIES TO ACHIEVE AND MATERIALIZE THE POLICIES

  • Manuscript Preparation for Double-Blind Review:

    • Authors are responsible for preparing their manuscripts in a way that conceals their identities from reviewers. Specific instructions include:
      • Submitting a separate title page containing author names, affiliations, contact information, and any acknowledgments. This page is not sent to reviewers.
      • Ensuring the main manuscript file (including figures, tables, and supplementary materials intended for review) is anonymized. This means removing all author names, affiliations, and any direct references to the authors' prior work if phrased in a self-identifying manner (e.g., use third-person phrasing like "Previous studies have shown [citation]" rather than "Our previous work showed [citation]").
      • Removing identifying information from the properties of the electronic file.
    • IJGCS provides detailed instructions for authors on how to anonymize their manuscripts in its "Author Guidelines" and "Manuscript Preparation Guidelines."

  • Reviewer Anonymity:

    • The journal's editorial management system is configured to ensure that reviewers' identities are not revealed to authors.
    • Reviewers are explicitly instructed not to include any information in their review reports or in their comments intended for authors that could reveal their identity.

  • Invitation to Review and Handling of Author Suggestions:

    • Potential reviewers are invited by the handling editor based on their expertise. The invitation includes the manuscript's abstract and clear instructions, including the deadline for the review.
    • Reviewers are required to assess for any potential conflicts of interest before accepting an invitation and must decline if a significant conflict exists.
    • If authors provide reviewer suggestions in their cover letter or via the submission system, the handling editor will assess these suggestions. Suggested reviewers will be vetted against IJGCS's criteria (expertise, h-index, publication record, institutional email, absence of COI with authors, etc.). The editor may or may not choose to use author-suggested reviewers and is not obliged to provide reasons for their decision. The editor will also independently identify and invite other reviewers.

  • Conducting and Submitting the Review:

    • Reviewers are provided with guidelines and often a structured review form to aid their assessment. They evaluate the manuscript based on criteria such as originality, significance of contribution, methodological soundness, clarity of presentation, and adherence to ethical standards.
    • Reviews should include specific comments and suggestions for the authors to improve their manuscript, as well as confidential comments for the editor to aid in the decision-making process.
    • Reviewers are encouraged to alert the editor to any suspected ethical issues, such as plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, or redundant publication.
    • All review reports must be submitted through the journal's online editorial system by the agreed-upon deadline.

  • Communication of Editorial Decisions:

    • The handling editor carefully considers all reviewer reports (and may seek additional reviews if necessary) before making an editorial decision.
    • Authors are provided with the anonymized reviewer comments and the editor's decision letter, which explains the basis for the decision.

  • Manuscript Revisions:

    • If revisions are requested, authors are expected to address all comments from the reviewers and editor in a thorough and systematic manner. A point-by-point response to the comments should accompany the resubmitted manuscript.
    • Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for re-evaluation, or assessed by the editor, depending on the extent of the revisions.

  • Ethical Obligations for Reviewers: IJGCSexpects all reviewers to adhere to high ethical standards, including:

    • Confidentiality: Treat the manuscript and review process as confidential.
    • Objectivity: Provide an unbiased and impartial assessment.
    • Expertise: Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have sufficient expertise.
    • Timeliness: Submit reviews by the agreed deadline.
    • Constructiveness: Frame feedback constructively to help authors improve their work.
    • Non-Exploitation: Do not use information from the manuscript for personal or third-party advantage.
    • Disclosure of Conflicts: Declare all potential conflicts of interest.
    • Reporting Concerns: Alert the editor to any ethical concerns regarding the manuscript or the review process.
    • No Delegation: Do not pass on a manuscript to another person for review without first obtaining permission from the journal.

  • Recognition of Reviewers:

    • IJGCS values the critical contribution of its peer reviewers. While individual anonymity is maintained in the double-blind process, the journal may publicly acknowledge its reviewers annually (e.g., through a list on its website or in an issue) for their service, with their explicit consent (as indicated by reviewers, including those suggested by authors). IJGCS may also explore integration with services that provide formal recognition for peer review activities.

This Peer Review Processes policy is designed to ensure a high standard of quality, fairness, and integrity for all articles published in Indonesian Journal of Guidance and Counseling Studies (IJGCS).