Peer Review Process
The submitted manuscript is first reviewed (pre-review) by an editor and must be free from plagiarism contents using Turnitin, the maximum limit of similarity is 30%. The submitted manuscript will be evaluated, whether it is suitable for our focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw.
Every submitted paper will be reviewed by at least two peer-reviewers. Reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers (double-blind review method). Reviewing process will consider novelty, objectivity, method, scientific impact, conclusion, and references. 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. Afterwards, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author.
All review process will be processed through JFFN online system.
1. Confirmation (Accept or Decline)
The reviewers will receive an email invitation that will be sent by the JFFN system. Use the links to accept or reject the invitation. If you decide to accept the invitation as the reviewer, you will be responsible to input the review result/s to the JFFN journal editor as the requirement whether the manuscript is appropriate to be published in JFFN.
2. Submitting the review
Reviews must be entered in the JFFN submission system. Drop us an email if you encounter trouble accessing the manuscript or entering your comments to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The deadline for completing the manuscript review process is 14 days. If you are unable to complete or need additional time for the review process, please notify us immediately so that we can keep the authors informed and assign alternative solution if necessary.
All reviewers are required to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and never share information to the other parties without the editor's consent. The involvement of third parties in the review process, must be declared during the review process. Correspondence as part of the review process is also to be treated confidentially by all parties.
All reviewers are strongly required to keep the confidentiality of process reviews, maintain material confidentiality of manuscripts, and will not take advantage during the review process.
Reviewers are anonymous by default. Reviewers’ identities are not revealed to authors or to other reviewers unless reviewers specifically request to be identified by signing their names at the end of their comments.
All reviewer’s identity will be kept confidential. The reviewer's identity will not be revealed to anyone unless reviewers specifically request to notify the identity by writing the name on the review form or comments.
WRITING THE REVIEW
Here are the generic questions to the reviewer. Please evaluate the submission based on the general scientific journal guideline.
The form covers:
1. Is the manuscript technically sound and do the data support the conclusion?
2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?
3. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English/Indonesian?
4. Review comments to the author? Please state the positive suggestion that might support the authors to improve the manuscript.
5. If you would like your identity to be revealed to the authors, please include your name here (optional) *Your name will not be published in the manuscript.
When an author revises a manuscript, the Academic Editor will often ask the original reviewer(s) to evaluate the authors’ revision. We expect the reviewers to be available to provide these additional comments. You will be requested to suggest the acceptance of the manuscript
In the revision process, the editorial team frequently will ask reviewers to evaluate the author's revision. The editorial team expects that all reviewers will be available to conduct evaluation and provide valuable suggestions to improve the manuscript quality. In the end, the reviewer will be asked to decide the appropriateness of the manuscript according to several categories:
- Accept without revision
- Accept with minor revision
- Accept with major revision