Peer Review Process


Editorial Policy

Peer Review Process

IMPACT: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Multidisipliner applies a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure that every published article meets high standards of academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical integrity, and relevance to community service practice. The identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Editorial and Peer Review Workflow

 
1. Initial Editorial Screening

The editorial office evaluates the manuscript for compliance with the journal scope, manuscript format, originality, ethical standards, completeness of submission, and plagiarism screening.

 
2. Assignment to Section Editor

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to a Section Editor who evaluates the manuscript's scientific suitability and selects qualified reviewers.

 
3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Each manuscript is reviewed independently by at least two expert reviewers. Neither reviewers nor authors know each other's identities during the review process.

 
4. Author Revision

Authors revise the manuscript according to reviewers' comments and submit a detailed response explaining how each recommendation has been addressed.

 
5. Final Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision after considering reviewers' recommendations, editorial evaluation, and the quality of the revised manuscript.

Review Criteria

Originality and Novelty

Contribution of the manuscript to community service knowledge and practice.

Scientific Quality

Clarity of objectives, methodology, implementation, evaluation, and discussion.

Community Impact

Evidence of measurable benefits and sustainability of the community service program.

Presentation Quality

Organization, clarity of writing, figures, tables, references, and compliance with journal guidelines.

Publication Ethics

Compliance with research ethics, publication ethics, originality, and integrity.

Editorial Decisions

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Resubmit for Review
  • Reject
Estimated Review Time

The journal aims to complete the peer review process within 4–8 weeks from the date of submission. The actual review duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, the quality of the submitted manuscript, and the number of revision rounds required.

Reviewer Ethics and Confidentiality

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, maintain strict confidentiality, disclose any conflicts of interest, and provide constructive, evidence-based feedback. Editorial decisions are based solely on academic merit and publication ethics, without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, or political beliefs.