Peer Review Process Policy

1. Overview and Review Model

INSIGHT: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Psikologi is committed to upholding the highest standards of peer review, scholarly rigor, and publishing ethics in the field of psychology. All submitted manuscripts undergo a structured peer review process to evaluate their scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, and relevance to theoretical and applied psychology.

Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review.
Confidentiality: The identities of both the authors and the peer reviewers are kept strictly anonymous throughout the entire review process.
Independent Evaluation: Every manuscript passing initial screening is assigned to at least two (2) independent expert peer reviewers with relevant domain expertise in psychology.

2. Peer Review Workflow

Step 1: Initial Desk Evaluation

Upon submission, the Managing Editor performs an initial screening to assess whether the manuscript falls within the scope of INSIGHT: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Psikologi, adheres to the journal's structural and ethical formatting guidelines, and passes similarity screening via plagiarism detection tools. Manuscripts with fundamental methodological flaws, severe lack of originality, or major ethical concerns are rejected at this stage without external review.

Step 2: Peer Reviewer Selection & Invitation

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary evaluation are assigned to a Handling Editor, who selects external independent reviewers based on their academic qualifications and publication record in psychology.

According to the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, reviewers must evaluate invitations based on their specific expertise, workload, and potential conflicts of interest.
Potential reviewers are expected to accept or decline review requests promptly upon receiving the invitation. (Source: COPE What to consider when asked to peer review a manuscript)

Step 3: Peer Review Execution & Ethical Obligations

Assigned reviewers evaluate the manuscript against key academic standards. During the evaluation process, reviewers are required to strictly observe the following ethical principles:

Objectivity and Constructiveness: Reviewers must provide objective, unbiased, and constructive feedback aimed at improving the psychological reasoning, research methods, and overall clarity of the manuscript. (Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)
Strict Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents and must not share, cite, or use unreleased findings for their own research or third-party purposes. (Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)
Declaration of Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must decline the invitation or consult the handling editor immediately if they identify any financial, personal, or collaborative competing interests. (Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)
Timeliness: Reviewers should submit their evaluation reports within the stipulated timeframe (typically 2–4 weeks) to prevent unnecessary delays in the publication of psychological research. (Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)

Step 4: Editorial Decision & Revisions

Once all reviewer reports are returned, the Handling Editor makes the final recommendation, which is then formally issued by the Editor-in-Chief:

Accept Submission: The manuscript is accepted in its current form.
Revisions Required: Authors must address specific comments (minor or major revisions) before final acceptance.
Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and will undergo a second round of external peer review.
Decline Submission: The manuscript is rejected due to insufficient scientific contribution, flawed methodology, or unresolvable conceptual issues.

3. Handling Unethical Practices & Misconduct

INSIGHT: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Psikologi follows official COPE procedures to handle potential breaches of ethical standards or peer review manipulation.

Suspected Misconduct or Misrepresentation: If a reviewer identifies potential plagiarism, duplicate submission, data fabrication, or ethical non-compliance regarding human research subjects, they must report it to the Editor without undertaking private investigations. The journal resolves these cases using the COPE Flowcharts on Suspected Misconduct.
Reviewer Conduct and Professionalism: Breaches of confidentiality, unauthorized manuscript sharing, or coercing authors to cite the reviewer’s own publications without scientific justification will lead to immediate removal from the reviewer panel.
Comment Moderation: The editorial team reserves the right to edit or redact abusive or inappropriate reviewer comments prior to transmitting them to authors, in accordance with COPE Guidance on Editing Peer Reviews.

4. References & Official COPE Links

The peer review policies implemented by INSIGHT: Jurnal Pemikiran dan Penelitian Psikologi are derived directly from the official guidance documents of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):