Peer Review Process

Kodifikasia: Jurnal Penelitian Islam applies a double-blind peer-review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and academic integrity of the articles it publishes. In this process, the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process. Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial assessment is evaluated by one qualified reviewer with expertise relevant to the subject of the manuscript.

The peer-review process generally takes 2–4 weeks, depending on the availability of the reviewer, the complexity of the manuscript, and the time required to complete the evaluation. This timeframe refers to the review stage and does not necessarily represent the total time from submission to publication.

Initial Editorial Assessment

All manuscripts submitted to Kodifikasia are first examined by the editorial team to determine their suitability for the journal’s focus and scope and their compliance with the author guidelines. The initial assessment considers the originality and relevance of the manuscript, the clarity of its research objectives, the appropriateness of its methodology, the quality of its academic presentation, and its compliance with publication ethics.

The editorial team may return a manuscript to the author for technical corrections or additional information before proceeding to peer review. Manuscripts that fall outside the journal’s scope, fail to meet the minimum standards of scholarly quality, or raise serious ethical concerns may be rejected at this stage without external review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are sent to one qualified reviewer whose expertise is relevant to the subject of the manuscript. Kodifikasia uses a double-blind peer-review system in which the identities of the author and reviewer are concealed from each other during the review process.

The reviewer evaluates the manuscript objectively and independently, considering its originality, academic significance, clarity of argumentation, relevance of the theoretical framework, appropriateness of the research methods, quality of data analysis and interpretation, accuracy of references, and contribution to the relevant field of scholarship.

As an interdisciplinary journal, Kodifikasia welcomes research across various scholarly disciplines examined from Islamic perspectives, including Islamic studies, Islamic education, Islamic law, Islamic economics, da’wah, Islamic psychology, and other relevant fields. Reviewers assess each manuscript according to the standards appropriate to its discipline and subject matter.

The reviewer provides constructive comments and a recommendation to assist the editorial team in determining the manuscript’s suitability for publication. The reviewer must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of the review.

Review Duration

The peer-review process generally takes 2–4 weeks from the time the manuscript is sent to the reviewer. The duration may vary depending on the reviewer’s availability, the complexity of the manuscript, and the need for additional clarification.

If the review cannot be completed within the expected timeframe, the editorial team may contact the reviewer to confirm the review schedule or take appropriate steps to ensure that the editorial process continues efficiently.

Authors are informed of the editorial decision after the review has been completed and the reviewer’s comments have been evaluated by the editorial team.

Editorial Decision

After receiving the reviewer’s report, the editorial team evaluates the reviewer’s comments and recommendation before making an editorial decision. The reviewer’s recommendation is an important consideration, but the final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor.

The possible editorial decisions are:

Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to any necessary editorial or technical adjustments.

Minor Revision: The author is required to make limited corrections or improvements before the manuscript can be accepted.

Major Revision: The author is required to make substantial revisions to address significant concerns regarding the manuscript’s argumentation, theoretical framework, methodology, analysis, or other important aspects.

Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards for originality, scholarly quality, relevance, methodological soundness, or ethical compliance.

The editorial decision and relevant reviewer comments are communicated to the corresponding author through the journal’s online submission system or other official editorial communication channels.

Manuscript Revision and Re-evaluation

Authors whose manuscripts require revision must address the reviewer’s comments and the editorial team’s instructions carefully. Authors are encouraged to submit a revised manuscript together with a response explaining how each substantive comment has been addressed. If an author does not adopt a particular recommendation, an academic justification should be provided.

The editorial team evaluates the revised manuscript to determine whether the required changes have been adequately implemented. When necessary, the revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewer for further assessment. A revision decision does not guarantee acceptance for publication.

If the author does not make the required revisions or the revised manuscript fails to meet the journal’s standards, the editorial team may request further revisions or reject the manuscript.

Final Decision and Publication

Following the review and revision stages, the editorial team conducts a final assessment of the manuscript, taking into account the reviewer’s report, the author’s revisions, the manuscript’s academic contribution, its relevance to the journal’s scope, and its compliance with publication ethics.

Manuscripts accepted for publication proceed to copyediting, proofreading, and layout according to the journal’s editorial procedures. Authors may be asked to check the final proofs to identify production errors before publication.

The final publication decision rests with the editorial team. All manuscripts are evaluated according to scholarly merit, relevance, and ethical standards, regardless of the authors’ institutional affiliations, academic positions, or personal backgrounds.

Ethical Responsibilities in Peer Review

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts fairly, objectively, confidentially, and within the agreed timeframe. They should provide clear academic reasons for their assessments, avoid personal criticism, identify relevant sources that may have been overlooked, and inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism, substantial overlap with previously published work, or other potential ethical concerns.

Authors are responsible for submitting original work, acknowledging relevant sources, providing accurate information, and ensuring that their manuscripts comply with the journal’s publication ethics. Manuscripts under consideration by Kodifikasia should not be submitted simultaneously to another journal.

All participants in the peer-review process are expected to uphold confidentiality, academic integrity, fairness, and editorial independence. Through this process, Kodifikasia seeks to publish high-quality scholarly articles that contribute meaningfully to the development of Islamic studies and interdisciplinary academic research.