Peer Review Process

Determination of the article published in JuMP is carried out through double-blind peer-review by considering two main aspects: relevance and contribution of articles. Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the manuscript will be sent to at least two reviewers. The double-blind peer-review process is adopted to ensure that the manuscript selection is carried out objectively. Editors and reviewers would provide constructive feedback on the manuscript evaluation results to the author(s). The detailed review process is explained as the following:

1. Before submission, the author must finalize the registration processes.

2. Editor in chief will perform an initial review emphasized the following critical points:

• Suitability of the draft compared to the focus and scope of the journal
• Significance and novelty of the draft.
• Compliance with the author guidelines.
• Plagiarism checking by Turnitin.
• Decisions by the editor in chief during the initial review are as follows:

• Rejected after the peer-review process: The manuscript will be sent back to the author with comments attached to the manuscript.
• Revision required: The manuscript is sent back to the author with a comment attached. These comments will direct the author to revise a few things before reuploading the document via the OJS system.
• Accepted for the further peer-review process: The manuscript will be sent to the section editor to be assigned to the reviewers.

4. Next, the section editor will assign each manuscript to at least two reviewers. During the review processes, the manuscript will be reviewed using a double-blind peer-review process.

5. Reviewers will then provide comments with the following recommendations:

• Accepted
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Rejected

6. The section editor and editor in chief will consider the recommendations and comments of reviewers before making the following decisions:

• Rejected: the manuscript will not proceed further for publication.
• Accepted: no revisions to the manuscript.
• Minor Revisions: the manuscript must be revised according to the comments from reviewers.
• Major Revisions: the manuscript must undergo major revisions according to the comments from reviewers.

7. After the section editor and editor-in-chief receive the manuscript, it will be sent to copyediting for drafting and editing before being sent back to the author for an overall review.

8. If changes required by authors with major and minor revisions are made prior to sending back to the system, the editor section will determine whether or not to proceed to the next revision process.

9. If the manuscript is rejected by the section editor and editor in chief, the author will be notified that the manuscript failed for publication. This decision is followed by the attached detailed comments.

10. After the layout is complete, the Letter of Agreement (LoA) will be sent to the author along with the final version of the manuscript.