Peer Review Process

Double-Blind Peer Review

Academic Quality · Objectivity · Scholarly Contribution

All manuscripts submitted to Jus et Civitas: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat undergo a double-blind peer review process to ensure academic quality, objectivity, and the scholarly contribution of each article to the field of law and community engagement.

Review Stages

1
Initial Editorial Check
The editor conducts a preliminary review to assess administrative completeness, alignment with the journal's focus and scope, and originality using plagiarism detection tools.
2
Peer Review by Referees
Manuscripts that pass the initial check are sent to at least two independent reviewers. The identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed under the double-blind mechanism. Reviewers evaluate novelty, methodology, scholarly contribution, and clarity of presentation.
3
Reviewer Recommendations
Reviewers will provide one of the following decisions:
- Accepted without revision
- Accepted with minor revision
- Accepted with major revision
- Rejected
4
Editorial Decision
The final decision is made by the editor based on reviewer comments. If necessary, revised manuscripts may be sent back to the reviewers for re-evaluation.
5
Revision by Authors
Authors are given a specific timeframe to revise their manuscripts based on reviewer feedback. Failure to revise adequately or in a timely manner may result in rejection.
6
Proofreading and Finalization
Once accepted, the editorial team will conduct final editing and proofreading before publication.