Peer Review Process

1. Introduction

Jurnal ELTIKOM (Jurnal Teknik Elektro, Teknologi Informasi dan Komputer) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly publishing. A rigorous and transparent peer review process is a cornerstone of this commitment, ensuring the quality, originality, relevance, and technical soundness of the articles published in the journal.

This policy describes ELTIKOM’s peer review model, the roles and responsibilities of editors and reviewers, and the procedures followed from manuscript submission to editorial decision. ELTIKOM applies a single-blind peer review process, in which the identities of reviewers are concealed from the authors, while reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities.

ELTIKOM adheres to best practices and ethical guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Description

Peer Review

Peer review is the critical evaluation of submitted manuscripts by independent experts in the relevant field. Its primary purpose is to assist editors in making informed publication decisions and to help authors improve the quality and clarity of their work.

Single-Blind Peer Review

ELTIKOM applies a single-blind peer review model, meaning that:

  • Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
  • Reviewers have access to the authors’ identities and affiliations.

This model allows reviewers to assess manuscripts with awareness of contextual factors such as research background and institutional environment, while maintaining reviewer anonymity to ensure honest, objective, and independent evaluations.

Roles and Responsibilities

  • Editors manage the peer review process, conduct initial screening, select appropriate reviewers, evaluate reviewer reports, and make final editorial decisions.
  • Reviewers provide independent, objective, and constructive assessments of the manuscript’s scientific and technical quality.

3. Peer Review Policy

3.1 Mandate for Peer Review

All scholarly manuscripts submitted to ELTIKOM, including research articles, technical papers, review articles, and case studies, undergo a peer review process before any publication decision is made.

Certain submission types, such as editorials or invited articles, may undergo editorial review only. This will be clearly communicated to authors when applicable.

3.2 Initial Editorial Review

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Board through an initial review. This stage assesses:

  • Relevance to the scope of ELTIKOM
  • Compliance with submission guidelines
  • Basic scholarly quality and originality
  • Ethical compliance (including plagiarism screening)

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be desk-rejected or returned to authors for correction before peer review.

3.3 Peer Review Model

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial review are sent to independent peer reviewers (Mitra Bebestari) under a single-blind review process.

ELTIKOM normally assigns at least two reviewers to each manuscript.

3.4 Selection of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected by the handling editor based on:

  • Expertise in the manuscript’s subject area
  • Research and publication track record
  • Ability to provide objective, critical, and constructive feedback
  • Absence of conflicts of interest

Reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest and decline the review if such a conflict exists.

3.5 Review Criteria

Each reviewer evaluates the manuscript based on both substantive and technical aspects, including but not limited to:

  • Originality and contribution to the field
  • Relevance to the scope of ELTIKOM
  • Methodological soundness and technical correctness
  • Quality of analysis and discussion
  • Clarity of presentation and organization
  • Adequacy of references and citations
  • Compliance with ethical standards

3.6 Review Timeline

ELTIKOM aims to complete the peer review process within approximately 1–3 months, depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

Authors are informed promptly of any significant delays.

3.7 Revision Process

Reviewer comments are communicated anonymously to the authors.

Authors are required to submit:

  • A revised manuscript
  • A point-by-point response explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or evaluated by the editor, depending on the extent of the revisions.

3.8 Editorial Decision

The final editorial decision—acceptance, revision, or rejection—is made by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated handling editor.

Decisions are based on:

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • The editor’s independent assessment
  • The manuscript’s relevance, quality, and ethical compliance

Editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by author nationality, institutional affiliation, or publication fees.

3.9 Confidentiality

All manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated as confidential.

Reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscript content with third parties
  • Use information obtained during peer review for personal advantage

3.10 Ethical Conduct of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to adhere to high ethical standards, including:

  • Confidentiality
  • Objectivity and impartiality
  • Constructive and respectful feedback
  • Timely completion of reviews
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest
  • Reporting suspected ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, redundant publication)

3.11 Recognition of Reviewers

ELTIKOM values the contribution of its reviewers. While reviewer anonymity is maintained during the review process, the journal may periodically acknowledge reviewers (e.g., annually on the journal website or in an issue), with the reviewers’ consent.

4. Appeals

Authors who believe that a significant error or procedural issue occurred during the peer review process may submit an appeal in accordance with ELTIKOM’s Complaints and Appeals Policy.