Editorial decisions in MOZAIK: Kajian Ilmu Sejarah rest on the evidence in the manuscript and on the reviews, not on the identity, nationality, institution, or standing of the authors, and not on fees or funding. The process follows the COPE Core Practices on peer review processes and journal management, and COPE’s guidance for editors.

Within up to 7 days of submission, the editors check scope, template, anonymisation, similarity, and ethics statements. The possible outcomes are:

One extension of up to 1 week may be requested for a revision. A revision that arrives late without an agreed extension may be treated as a new submission.

—  At least two independent reviewers assess each research article; the editor may add a third. Book and film reviews receive editorial review.

—  The handling editor weighs the reviews, does not simply count votes, and may invite an additional reviewer if the reviews disagree sharply.

—  Inappropriate or personal comments are removed or edited before reviews are sent to authors.

—  Every decision letter gives the reasons and includes the reviewers’ comments.

—  Manuscripts by editors or board members are decided by another editor, and the editor-author has no access to the process.

—  Authors revise the manuscript and explain each change, or why a suggestion was not followed, in a response letter.

—  Acceptance is final only after all requested changes have been made and the ethics and declaration requirements are met.

—  The first decision is usually made within about 6 weeks, and the final decision by week 14, or at the latest 4 months after submission.

—  After acceptance, the article is copyedited, laid out, and published online with a DOI. The Article Publication Charge is requested only after acceptance. See Author Fees.

—  Authors who believe a decision is wrong may appeal within 30 days. See Editorial Appeals.

—  An acceptance may be withdrawn before publication if serious problems are found, such as plagiarism, fabricated data, or undisclosed duplicate publication. See Research Misconduct.

—  Decisions are never changed in return for payment or pressure.

—  Decisions are based only on scholarly merit and relevance to the scope, never on the authors' nationality, ethnicity, religion, political beliefs, institution, or ability to pay.

—  The final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief in an editorial meeting, on the basis of the reviewers' reports and the handling editor's recommendation. Desk rejections at the initial check are also confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief.

—  The journal does not guarantee acceptance at submission.

—  Automated tools: similarity-check software is used at the initial check. Generative AI is not used to make decisions or write decision letters; if an editor uses AI for language checks of their own comments, this is disclosed under the AI in Peer Review policy.

Peer Review Process  ·  Editorial Appeals  ·  Peer Review Manipulation  ·  Publication Ethics  ·  [MOZAIK email]