Peer Review Process

 

The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated in the office, whether it is suitable for Jurnal Ilmiah Cano Ekonomos focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similarity score by using Turnitin. The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Double Blind Review).

When reviewing the article, please consider the following guidelines:
Title and Abstract
1. The title describes the article clearly
2. Abstracts are well-written and have the ability to make a good impression

Introduction
1. The problem statement is clear and well-articulated
2. Novelty is well explained
3. The conceptual (theoretical) framework is presented clearly, based on a review of research results.
4. Research questions and research hypotheses (if any) are presented clearly, concisely, and completely
5. Literature review is well-integrated and critically analyzed
6. Literature up to date
7. The main references from primary sources (scientific journals), sufficient quantity and good quality

Method
1. Research design is explained clearly and in detail
2. The measurement of variables is clearly defined and in accordance with the research variables
3. Data collection techniques are well explained
4. Population is clearly defined
5. The sampling procedure is explained in detail
6. The data analysis procedure is described in sufficient detail, in accordance with the research design, hypotheses, and research model
7. The assumptions underlying the use of statistics are explained
8. In qualitative research, the basic requirements of data reliability, validity, trustworthiness, and absence of bias are met.

Result and Discussions
1. The results are compiled in a complete, effective, and easy-to-understand manner and describe the research findings
2. The results explain what/how why and explore novelty or research contributions according to the topics discussed
3. Statistical results are reported correctly and precisely.
4. The theoretical perspective related to interpretation is discussed
5. The practical implications or theoretical implications are discussed

Conclusions
1. The conclusion is clearly stated; key points are explained.
2. Conclusions according to the design, method, and results
3. The justification for the conclusion is well-articulated
4. Research limitations and recommendations for future research are explained

Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses. The suggested decision will be evaluated in an editorial board meeting. Afterward, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author. Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. The review process will take approximately 4 to 12 weeks. Decisions categories include:

  • Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to Jurnal Ilmiah Cano Ekonomos
  • Resubmit for Review“ The submission needs to be reworked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. However, It will require a second round of review.
  • Revision Required - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in Jurnal Ekonomi Modernisasi under the condition that minor/major modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
  • Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.