Peer Review Process

1. Manuscript Submission by Author

The authors have submitted their manuscript to the journal's online system. The submitted manuscript must comply with the established writing guidelines, both in terms of the format and scope of the journal theme.

2. Initial Editorial Assessment by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)

Once the manuscript is received in the system, the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) conducts an initial assessment of:

  1. Ensure that the manuscript fits the thematic focus and scope of the journal.
  2. Evaluate the initial quality of the manuscript, including the relevance of the scientific contribution and appropriateness of the research methods.
  3. Ensure adherence to journal formatting guidelines.
  4. Decision by the EIC:
  • Rejected: If the manuscript does not fit the journal's theme or has fundamental flaws. The author was informed of the reasons for rejection.
  • Continued: If the manuscript is appropriate, the EIC appoints an Associate Editor (AE) to handle the peer-review process.

3. Appointment of Reviewers by Associate Editor (AE)

The AE is responsible for appointing two or more independent reviewers with expertise in the topic area of the manuscript. This process aims to maintain the integrity of the double-blind review, where the identities of the authors and reviewers are kept confidential. AE Task at This Stage

  • Select reviewers based on their expertise.
  • The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
  • Overseeing the review process and providing guidance, if needed.

4. Peer Review Process

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts in depth with a focus on the following:

  • Quality of the scientific contribution to the field of Sharia Law and Economics.
  • Research methodology and data analysis.
  • Clarity of argumentation, structure, and conclusions.

The reviewer makes one of the following recommendations:

  • Accepted without revision.
  • Accepted with minor revisions.
  • Major revisions (resubmitted).
  • Rejected.

The reviewer also provided constructive comments to help the author improve the quality of the manuscript.

5. Author Submits Amendments

If revisions are requested, the author must:

  1. We have corrected the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments.
  2. Upload the revised manuscript using this system.
  3. Include a Response to Reviewer explaining how the comments have been addressed. Revision Stage Process:
  • The Associate Editor (AE) checked the initial revision to ensure that the author met all the criteria requested by the reviewer.
  • If the revisions are adequate, the AE sends the manuscript back to the reviewers for reevaluation (Review Round 2).
  • The reviewer evaluated whether the revisions were appropriate and provided a final recommendation for the AE.

6. Manuscript Evaluation and Acceptance

After Review Round 2, the AE conducts a final check to ensure that the manuscript meets the journal's standards, mainly in terms of conformity to standards and criteria, and not scientific quality.

  • If the manuscript meets the standards, the AE makes a recommendation to the EIC for the final decision.
  • The EIC makes the final decision based on the input from the AE and reviewers.
  • Decision: The manuscript has been accepted, and the authors are notified with final feedback.

7. Publication Process

Accepted manuscripts enter the production stage, including

  1. Layout and language editing.
  2. Adjustments were made in accordance with journal guidelines [journal template].
  3. DOI (Digital Object Identifier) assignment.

8. Online Publication (Publish)

Processed manuscripts are published online using a continuous publication model. Using this model, research can be accessed directly by the international academic community.

Editor-in-Chief (EIC)

  • Assessment of the initial quality of the manuscript.
  • Appoints AEs and makes the final decision regarding manuscript acceptance based on AE and reviewer recommendations.

Associate Editor (AE)

  • Handling the peer-review process.
  • Ensures that revisions meet standards and criteria before being forwarded to reviewers or the EIC.
  • Provide final recommendations for the EIC.

Reviewer

  • Evaluating manuscripts in depth and providing constructive comments.
  • Assess revisions in Review Round 2 before making final recommendations for AE.

Publication Process Timeline

  1. Editorial Assessment by EIC and AE: 1 Week
  2. Peer Review (AE assigns reviewers): 1-2 Months
  3. Revision by the Author (checked by AE): 1-4 Weeks (depending on the revision level)
  4. Review Round 2 (evaluated by reviewers and AE): 1-2 Weeks
  5. Final Decision by EIC: 1 Week
  6. Publication Process: 2-3 Weeks
  7. Publication Online: 1 Week

Total time: 1.5 months to 3 months, depending on the speed of revision by the author and evaluation of reviewers.