Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process
How manuscripts submitted to JPK (Jurnal Pendidikan Khusus) are screened, reviewed, and decided.
1Type of Review

JPK uses double-blind peer review. The identities of the authors are hidden from the reviewers, and the identities of the reviewers are hidden from the authors. Authors must prepare an anonymous manuscript. See the Author Guidelines for how to anonymize a manuscript.

2Review Steps
  1. Submission: the author submits the manuscript and the title page through the online system.
  2. Editorial screening: the editors check the scope, the template, the anonymization, and the quality of the manuscript. Manuscripts that do not fit are rejected or returned to the authors.
  3. Similarity check: the manuscript is checked with Turnitin. See the Plagiarism Policy.
  4. Peer review: the editor sends the manuscript to independent reviewers who are experts in the topic.
  5. Editor's decision: the editor decides based on the reviewers' reports.
  6. Revision: if revision is needed, the authors revise the manuscript and respond to each comment. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers.
  7. Final decision and publication: accepted manuscripts go through copyediting and proofreading, then are published in an issue. See the Publishing Schedule.
3Possible Decisions
Accepted
The manuscript is accepted without revision.
Minor revision
The manuscript is accepted after small changes.
Major revision
The manuscript needs important changes and is reviewed again.
Rejected
The manuscript is not suitable for publication in JPK.

The decision is sent through the online system. The editors make the final decision.

4What Reviewers Look At
  • Fit with the scope of the journal.
  • Originality and contribution to special education.
  • Clarity of the problem, aim, and literature review.
  • Suitability of the method, data, and analysis.
  • Whether the results and discussion are supported by the data.
  • Research ethics, including ethical approval and informed consent where needed.
  • Quality of writing, references, tables, and figures.
5Responsibilities of Reviewers
  • Review the manuscript fairly, objectively, and with constructive comments.
  • Keep the manuscript confidential and not use its content for personal benefit.
  • Decline the review if there is a conflict of interest or if they are not an expert on the topic. See Conflict of Interest.
  • Tell the editor if they suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other misconduct.
6Responsibilities of Authors
  • Revise the manuscript following the comments, or explain clearly why a comment is not followed.
  • Do not contact reviewers directly, and do not submit the manuscript to another journal while it is under review at JPK.
  • Follow the Publication Ethics of the journal.
Reviewers: see the list of reviewers. Questions about the review process: jpk_plb@uny.ac.id.