Additional Menu
Peer Review Process
Peer Review Process Policy - Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Indonesia (JIAI)
Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi Indonesia (JIAI) is committed to upholding the highest standards of peer review to ensure the validity, quality, and integrity of all published accounting research. In strict adherence to international best practices and ethical frameworks, JIAI follows the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, ensuring that every manuscript undergoes a rigorous, fair, and confidential evaluation process.
1. Double-Blind Peer Review Model
To eliminate potential biases based on author identity, institutional affiliation, or country of origin, JIAI implements a double-blind peer review process. Both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the evaluation. This mechanism aligns with the recommendations found in the COPE Guidelines on Peer Review Integrity, promoting objective critique and scholarly merit as the sole criteria for acceptance.
To eliminate potential biases based on author identity, institutional affiliation, or country of origin, JIAI implements a double-blind peer review process. Both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other throughout the evaluation. This mechanism aligns with the recommendations found in the COPE Guidelines on Peer Review Integrity, promoting objective critique and scholarly merit as the sole criteria for acceptance.
2. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers
Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining publication standards. They are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, maintain absolute confidentiality regarding the contents of the paper, and declare any potential conflicts of interest immediately. Following the principles outlined in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, reviewers must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage, and they must provide constructive, well-substantiated feedback to help authors improve their work.
Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining publication standards. They are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, maintain absolute confidentiality regarding the contents of the paper, and declare any potential conflicts of interest immediately. Following the principles outlined in the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, reviewers must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage, and they must provide constructive, well-substantiated feedback to help authors improve their work.
3. Editorial Decision-Making and Impartiality
Editors of JIAI hold final responsibility for deciding whether a manuscript is accepted, revised, or rejected based on the reviewers' recommendations, scientific validity, and scope of the journal. Editors must remain entirely impartial and avoid any conflicts of interest concerning the articles they evaluate. In accordance with the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, editorial decisions are never influenced by commercial interests, external pressures, or personal relationships with the authors.
Editors of JIAI hold final responsibility for deciding whether a manuscript is accepted, revised, or rejected based on the reviewers' recommendations, scientific validity, and scope of the journal. Editors must remain entirely impartial and avoid any conflicts of interest concerning the articles they evaluate. In accordance with the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, editorial decisions are never influenced by commercial interests, external pressures, or personal relationships with the authors.
4. Handling Peer Review Manipulation and Misconduct
JIAI maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward peer review manipulation, fraudulent reviewer suggestions, or compromised review integrity. If the editorial team detects any suspicious activities or breaches of confidentiality during the review cycle, the journal investigates the matter thoroughly, utilizing the procedures described in the COPE Flowchart on Suspicious Peer Review in a Submitted Manuscript to ensure accountability and protect the scholarly record.
JIAI maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward peer review manipulation, fraudulent reviewer suggestions, or compromised review integrity. If the editorial team detects any suspicious activities or breaches of confidentiality during the review cycle, the journal investigates the matter thoroughly, utilizing the procedures described in the COPE Flowchart on Suspicious Peer Review in a Submitted Manuscript to ensure accountability and protect the scholarly record.
