Reviewer Guidelines
INFOTERA: Journal of Integrated Information Systems relies on the expertise and dedication of its reviewers to maintain the scientific quality and integrity of published research. These guidelines explain the role, responsibilities, and ethical expectations of reviewers participating in the journal's double-blind peer-review process.
1. Role and Responsibilities
- Assist the editor in making fair editorial decisions through objective, evidence-based evaluation.
- Help authors improve their manuscript with constructive, specific, and respectful feedback.
- Decline the assignment and notify the editor promptly if you feel unqualified, have a conflict of interest, or cannot complete the review on time.
- Complete the review within the agreed timeframe (typically 3-6 weeks).
2. Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers are asked to assess each manuscript against the following criteria:
- Originality: Does the work present new ideas, methods, or findings? Is it a significant contribution to the field?
- Scope and Relevance: Does the manuscript fit the aims and scope of INFOTERA?
- Methodology: Is the research design sound, appropriate, and described in enough detail to be reproducible?
- Results and Analysis: Are the results clearly presented, valid, and supported by the data?
- Discussion and Conclusion: Are the interpretations justified and consistent with the results? Are limitations acknowledged?
- Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript well organized, clearly written, and easy to follow?
- References and Citations: Are the references relevant, sufficient, current, and formatted in IEEE style? Identify any important omitted works.
- Figures and Tables: Are they clear, necessary, properly numbered, and cited in the text?
3. Recommendation Options
After evaluation, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations to the editor:
- Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication as is or with negligible changes.
- Minor Revisions: The manuscript is acceptable after small corrections that do not require re-review.
- Major Revisions: The manuscript has potential but requires substantial changes and may need re-review.
- Reject: The manuscript has fundamental flaws or is outside the journal scope and is not suitable for publication.
The final editorial decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, who considers all reviewer recommendations.
4. Ethical Responsibilities
- Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Do not share, discuss, or use any part of the content without authorization.
- Objectivity: Reviews must be objective and supported by clear arguments. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.
- Conflict of Interest: Decline to review any manuscript in which you have a competing interest arising from collaborative, financial, institutional, or personal relationships with the authors.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited, and alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap with other published work.
- Anonymity: As this is a double-blind process, do not attempt to identify the authors and do not reveal your identity within review comments.
5. Writing the Review
- Provide a brief summary of the manuscript to confirm your understanding of its aims and contribution.
- Separate comments into those for the editor (confidential) and those for the authors.
- Number your comments and refer to specific sections, pages, or lines where possible.
- Be constructive: explain not only what is wrong but how it can be improved.
We sincerely thank our reviewers for their valuable time and expertise. For questions regarding the review process, please contact the editorial office at editor-infotera@jurnal-ilmiah.com.
