Peer Review Process

Swadaya: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat is a journal that employs a double-blind peer review process. Every manuscript submitted to Swadaya for publication undergoes peer review. This process involves the evaluation of the submitted manuscript by two or more individuals with similar expertise as the author. Its purpose is to determine the suitability of the academic work for publication. The peer review method is used to maintain quality standards and credibility for the manuscripts. The peer review process in this journal proceeds in 9 steps, as follows:

1. Submission of Manuscript

The corresponding or submitting author submits the manuscript to the journal. This is done via an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). However, to facilitate authors, Swadaya temporarily also accepts manuscript submissions by email.

2. Editorial Office Assessment

The Swadaya editor first assesses the submitted manuscript. The editor checks whether it suits the journal's focus and scope. The composition and arrangement of the manuscript are evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to ensure it includes the required sections and stylizations. In addition, an assessment of the minimum required quality of the manuscript for publication begins at this step, including evaluating whether there is a major methodological flaw. Every submitted manuscript that passes this step will be checked using Turnitin to identify any plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief checks if the manuscript is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant for publication. If not, the manuscript may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

4. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be an appropriate reviewer (also known as referees) based on expertise, closeness of research interest, and no conflict of interest considerations. The peer review process at Swadaya involves a community of experts in a field related to the journal's focus and scope who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial reviews. Impartiality is also maintained by the double-blind peer review employed in this journal. That is, the reviewer does not know the author's identity. Conversely, the author does not know the reviewer's identity. The manuscript is sent to reviewers anonymously.

5. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for suggestions for an alternative reviewer if they decline to review.

6. Review is Conducted

The reviewers allocate time to read the manuscript several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the manuscript without further work. Otherwise, they will read the manuscript several times, taking notes to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject the manuscript or else request a revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor consider all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ significantly between both reviewers, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer to obtain an extra opinion before deciding.

8. The Decision is Communicated

The editor sends a decision email to the author, including any comments from the relevant reviewer. Reviewer comments are sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.

9. Final Steps

If accepted, the manuscript will be sent for copy-editing. If the article is rejected or sent back to the author for either major or minor revision, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. The author should make corrections and revise the manuscript per the reviewers' comments and instructions.

After revision, the author should resubmit the revised manuscript to the editor.

If the manuscript was returned for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive the revised version unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested, the handling editor might do this follow-up review.

If the editor is satisfied with the revised manuscript, it is accepted. The accepted manuscripts will be published online and are freely available as downloadable PDF files.