Responsibility of Peer Reviewer
Peer reviewer is responsible for critiquing by reading and evaluating manuscripts in the field of expertise, then giving constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article, how to increase the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript.
Before reviewing, please note the following:
- Is the article requested to be reviewed in accordance with your expertise? If you receive a script that covers the topics that are not appropriate areas of your expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible. Please recommend an alternative reviewer.
- Do you have the time to review this paper? The review process must be completed within two weeks. If you agree and require a longer period, notify the editor as soon as possible, or suggest an alternative reviewer.
- Is there any potential conflict of interest? Meanwhile, conflicts of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer, disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, do not hesitate to contact the editorial office.
When reviewing the article, please consider the following:
- Title: is it clearly illustrating the article?
- Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article?
Content of the Article
- In order to determine the originality and suitability for the journal, are there any elements of plagiarism over 20% of this paper field?
- if the study had been previously done by other authors, it is still eligible for publication?
- is the article is fairly new, fairly deep, and interesting to be published?
- does it contribute to knowledge?
- does the article adhere to the standards of the journal?
- Scope - Is the article in line with the objectives and scope of the journal?
Relevance: Relevant to the topic and method of community service for publication in journals
Contribution: The quality of the paper in terms of ideas / ideas and originality (originality), novelty (novelty), and innovation (innovation). Contribution to the development of science and technology and society is well illustrated
Abstract (Indonesian and English): Brief, clear and complete, can describe the content of community service and attract the attention of readers
Introduction:The problem is formulated sharply and actually, The benefits of community service for the development of science and technology and the community Outcome of community service according to the goals and benefits
Method:The method used is complete, detailed, and clear, systematic, original, up-to-date including design, service implementation procedures.
Results: Presentation of results (can be in Tables and Figures for easy understanding) depth of discussion in problem management and as needed. Is it suitable with the referred explanation by showing data which is easy to to interprete and understanable for the readers?
Conclusion: Describe the essence of the results of the dedication performed
Readability of the text: The language used, clarity of article content and implementation by authors
Reference: Conformity references given, procedures and references to the manuscript
- All results of the review submitted by reviewers are confidential
- If you want to discuss the article with a colleague, kindly inform the editor
- Do not contact the author directly.
- Ethical issues:
- Plagiarism: if you suspect the article is mostly plagiarism from other authors, please let the editor knows the details
- Complete "The Review" by the due date to the editorial office. Your recommendation for the article will be considered when the editor makes a final decision and your honest feedback is highly appreciated.
When you write a comment, please show the part of the comment that is only intended for the editor and parts that can be returned to the author.
Please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office with any questions or problems that you may encounter