Peer Review Process

BDJ Action: Breakthrough Development Journal in Advancing Communities Through Innovation & Outreach Network adheres to a double-blind peer review process to ensure the integrity, quality, and academic rigor of the manuscripts it publishes. This process helps maintain high scholarly standards and ensures that only the most relevant and impactful research is shared with our global audience.

1. Submission and Initial Screening

  • Initial Evaluation: Upon submission, the manuscript will first be evaluated by the journal’s editorial team. This evaluation focuses on ensuring that the manuscript aligns with the journal's scope and adheres to the submission guidelines.
  • Pre-screening for Plagiarism: The manuscript will be checked for plagiarism using plagiarism detection software. Any manuscript found to have significant issues related to plagiarism will be rejected immediately.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Reviewer Assignment: If the manuscript passes the initial evaluation, it is then sent to two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field of study. The identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential, hence the term "double-blind" review.
  • Review Criteria: Reviewers assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including:
    • Originality and novelty of the research
    • Relevance to the journal's scope, particularly in the area of Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (Community Service)
    • Clarity and organization of the manuscript
    • Methodological rigor and appropriateness
    • Significance and impact of the findings on community development
    • Quality and accuracy of references and citations
  • Reviewer Feedback: Reviewers are required to provide constructive, unbiased feedback on the manuscript. They may suggest revisions to improve the clarity, quality, and impact of the manuscript. Reviewers may also recommend acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection of the manuscript based on their evaluation.

3. Editorial Decision

  • Initial Decision: After receiving the reviewers' feedback, the Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief will make an initial decision on the manuscript, which could be one of the following:
    • Accept: If the manuscript meets all the necessary criteria and requires no revisions.
    • Minor Revisions: If the manuscript requires minor changes before it can be accepted for publication.
    • Major Revisions: If the manuscript requires significant revisions, but the overall concept is strong enough for reconsideration.
    • Reject: If the manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards or is not suitable for the journal's scope.
  • Decision Notification: The editorial team will inform the corresponding author of the decision, along with the feedback provided by the reviewers. If revisions are required, the author will be given specific guidance on what changes are needed.

4. Revisions and Resubmission

  • Revised Manuscript Submission: If revisions are requested, authors should revise their manuscript according to the reviewers' comments and resubmit it within the stipulated timeframe. Authors must also include a response letter that outlines how they have addressed each reviewer’s comment.
  • Second Review (if necessary): After resubmission, the revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers or to new reviewers for a second round of evaluation. The reviewers will assess whether the authors have sufficiently addressed the required revisions.
  • Final Decision: Based on the reviewers' feedback on the revised manuscript, the final decision will be made. If the manuscript is deemed acceptable, it will be prepared for publication.

5. Acceptance and Publication

  • Once the manuscript is accepted, it will undergo final editing, including language and formatting checks, before being published online.
  • Authors will be notified once their manuscript is scheduled for publication, and an official publication date will be provided.

6. Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

  • Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They should not share or discuss the manuscript with others without permission from the editor.
  • Impartiality: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively and without bias, based solely on the scientific quality and contribution to the field.
  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide an unbiased review. If any conflict arises, they must recuse themselves from the review process.

7. Publication Ethics

  • Transparency: The journal maintains a high standard of transparency throughout the peer review process. Reviewers' comments and authors’ responses are shared openly with all parties involved.
  • Integrity: BDJ Action maintains strict ethical standards throughout the peer review process, ensuring that every manuscript is evaluated fairly and with integrity.

This Peer Review Process ensures that BDJ Action publishes only high-quality, impactful research that advances the field of Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (Community Service). If you have any further questions or would like additional details, feel free to ask!