Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy

Introduction

The rigor of peer review ensures the academic quality and integrity of every article published in the Journal of Islamic Economics and Business Perspectives (JIEBP). All submitted manuscripts undergo a structured double-blind peer review before publication.

Double-Blind Peer Review

CJIEB employs a double-blind system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. All identifying information is removed from the manuscript prior to review. This process minimizes potential bias and fosters objective evaluation.

 

The Peer Review Process

CJIEB follows a three-stage review process: Editorial Office Review, External Review, and Editorial Decision.

Stage 1: Editorial Office Review

Upon submission, each manuscript is checked to ensure it meets JIEBP’s basic requirements before being sent to external reviewers. Key checks include:

1.      Plagiarism Screening

o    Manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin).

o    Submissions with significant similarity to existing works—including the author’s own prior publications—may be rejected.

o    Authors receive a similarity report if issues are identified.

2.      AI-Generated Content

o    Manuscripts are evaluated for undisclosed AI-generated text.

o    Authors are encouraged to transparently disclose any AI tools used in research or writing.

o    Undeclared or unoriginal AI-generated content may lead to rejection.

3.      Scope Compliance

o    The editorial team confirms that the topic aligns with JIEBP’s focus on Islamic economics, Islamic finance, and Islamic business.

o    Manuscripts outside the scope may be returned or, with author consent, suggested for transfer to a more suitable journal.

4.      Currency of References

o    Authors are encouraged to include recent references, preferably within the last five years.

5.      Language and Clarity

o    JIEBP publishes in English (preferred) or Indonesian with an English abstract.

o    Manuscripts are checked for structure, organization, and readability.

o    Those with serious language issues may be returned for revision.

Timeline: Stage 1 is usually completed within one week.

 

Stage 2: External Review (Double-Blind)

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two expert reviewers based on:

·         Subject expertise

·         Absence of conflicts of interest

·         Institutional and geographic diversity

Reviewers assess manuscripts for originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the field, and recommend one of the following:

·         Requires minor corrections

·         Requires moderate revision

·         Requires major revision

·         Declined for publication (with reasons provided)

If reviewer opinions diverge significantly, a third reviewer may be consulted. Reviewer comments are shared anonymously with the authors.

Timeline: Stage 2 is generally completed within 1–4 weeks, depending on reviewer availability.

 

Stage 3: Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief considers the original submission, reviewer feedback, and any revised versions to reach one of the following decisions:

·         Accept as is

·         Accept with minor corrections

·         Requires major revisions

·         Resubmit for review (conditional rejection)

·         Declined for publication

Authors may be asked for multiple revisions. In certain cases, the revised manuscript may be re-evaluated by the original reviewers.

Timeline: The entire peer review process typically concludes within 4–6 weeks.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and peer review reports are treated as strictly confidential. Editors and reviewers must not share or use any part of the content for personal advantage.

Ethical Standards

JIEBP adheres to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Authors, reviewers, and editors must maintain objectivity, confidentiality, and integrity, and must disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

Right to Appeal

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing clear justifications and evidence. Appeals will be fairly reviewed by the editorial team and, if necessary, by an independent reviewer.

Reviewer Recognition

JIEBP highly values the service of peer reviewers. Their contributions may be acknowledged—without compromising anonymity—through certificates, Publons, or similar recognition mechanisms.