Focus and Scope Manuscript Types Editorial Team Reviewers Journal Accreditation Author Guidelines Declaration Statements Article Processing Charge Peer Review Process Publication Ethics Generative AI Policy Plagiarism Policy Open Access Policy Article Template Copyright and License Archiving Commitment Letter Article Processing Fees Journal Indexing Declaration Statements
Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Absis: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Matematika undergo an editorial screening followed, where appropriate, by an independent double-blind peer review. This process aims to ensure the scientific quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of articles published in the journal.
1. Initial Editorial Screening
The editorial team initially evaluates each submission for its relevance to the journal's focus and scope, completeness, originality, language quality, and compliance with the manuscript template and author guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or declined before external review.
2. Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to qualified external reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject of the submission. Jurnal Absis uses a double-blind review system: the reviewers do not receive the authors' identities, and the authors are not informed of the reviewers' identities. The editorial team manages the anonymization and review process.
Reviewers assess the manuscript's scholarly contribution, soundness of the research approach, appropriateness of the analysis, clarity of the findings and discussion, relevance of the references, and consistency of the conclusions with the evidence presented. Reviewer recommendations are advisory and inform the editorial decision.
3. Editorial Decision
After considering the review reports and the journal's publication standards, the responsible editor communicates the decision to the corresponding author. Depending on the assessment, the manuscript may be accepted, require minor or major revisions, or be rejected. The final publication decision rests with the editorial team, not with an individual reviewer.
4. Revision and Reassessment
When revisions are requested, authors should address the comments carefully, revise the manuscript accordingly, and provide a clear response explaining how the comments have been handled. The revised submission may be evaluated by the editor or returned to reviewers for further assessment when necessary. A request for revision does not guarantee acceptance.
5. Acceptance and Production
Manuscripts are accepted for publication only after the editorial team determines that the required scientific and editorial standards have been met. Accepted manuscripts then proceed to copyediting, layout preparation, final checks, and publication. Any applicable article processing charge is communicated separately in accordance with the journal's Article Processing Charges policy.
6. Review Timeline and Communication
Under favorable conditions, the review process may be completed in approximately two weeks. However, the actual duration depends on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the extent of revisions required. This timeframe is an indication of the earliest possible review period, not a guaranteed deadline.
Authors receive notifications by email at relevant stages of manuscript handling, including submission, review, revision, resubmission, and production. Authors should monitor the email address registered with the journal and respond to editorial requests promptly.
