Peer Review Process

JOURNAL INTERDISCIPLINARY HEALTH (JIH)

Peer Review Process

Editorial Independence • Research Integrity • Transparent Peer Review

Peer Review Standard: At least two independent expert reviewers evaluate each research manuscript considered for publication.

1. Peer Review Policy

Journal Interdisciplinary Health (JIH) is committed to maintaining scientific quality, editorial independence, research integrity, and transparency throughout the scholarly publication process.

Each research manuscript considered for publication is subject to editorial screening and evaluation by at least two qualified and independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript. The journal's peer review process is intended to ensure objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluation.

2. Peer Review Model

JIH applies a double-anonymous peer review model, in which authors' and reviewers' identities are concealed from one another during the review process.

Reviewer selection is based on subject expertise, methodological competence, independence, and the absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Editorial and Peer Review Workflow

Stage 1 – Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the journal's Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, following the author guidelines and submission requirements.

Stage 2 – Initial Editorial Screening

The editor evaluates the manuscript's relevance to the journal's scope, originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, reporting transparency, and adherence to submission guidelines.

Stage 3 – Independent Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts passing editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers. Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting an assignment.

Stage 4 – Scientific Evaluation

Reviewers independently assess originality, scientific contribution, research objectives, study design, methodology, data analysis, interpretation, ethical compliance, and the validity of conclusions.

Stage 5 – Editorial Decision

The responsible editor considers the independent reviewer reports and may decide to accept the manuscript, request minor or major revisions, seek additional review, or reject the submission.

Stage 6 – Revision and Reassessment

Authors submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point response to reviewer comments. Further review may be requested when necessary.

Stage 7 – Final Editorial Decision

The editor makes the final decision based on scientific merit, reviewer recommendations, ethical compliance, and the adequacy of manuscript revisions.

4. Reviewer Independence and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must provide objective and impartial evaluations. They must decline assignments involving potential conflicts of interest, including:

  • Employment at the same institution as an author.
  • Recent close research collaboration or supervisory relationships.
  • Financial, professional, or personal interests affecting impartiality.
  • Any circumstance compromising independent scientific judgment.

Editors with conflicts of interest must transfer editorial responsibility to another qualified, independent editor.

5. Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

  • Originality and scientific contribution.
  • Relevance and clarity of research objectives.
  • Appropriateness of study design and methodology.
  • Validity and transparency of statistical or qualitative analysis.
  • Accuracy and clarity of results.
  • Critical interpretation of findings and limitations.
  • Research ethics and reporting guideline compliance.
  • Scientific relevance of conclusions and recommendations.

6. Peer Review Timeline

Editorial Activity Target Duration
Initial editorial screening 5–7 days
Reviewer invitation and confirmation 3–7 days
Initial peer review 14–21 days
Minor revision 7–14 days
Major revision 14–30 days
Editorial reassessment 5–10 days

These are operational targets rather than guaranteed processing times. Actual durations may vary depending on manuscript complexity and reviewer availability.

7. Confidentiality and Publication Ethics

Manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, reproduce, or use unpublished material for personal or professional advantage.

Suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, authorship misconduct, or other ethical concerns are assessed in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies and relevant COPE guidance.

8. Generative Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review

Reviewers and editors remain personally accountable for the confidentiality, accuracy, independence, and integrity of their assessments.

Confidential manuscripts and unpublished research data must not be uploaded to public generative AI systems without explicit authorization and appropriate confidentiality safeguards.

AI-generated assessments must not replace independent expert peer review. Any permitted AI-assisted activity must comply with the journal's confidentiality and disclosure requirements.

9. Peer Review Documentation and Quality Assurance

JIH maintains internal editorial and peer review records through the Open Journal Systems platform for accountability, quality assurance, and verification of editorial procedures.

  • Submission and editorial screening dates.
  • Reviewer invitations and acceptance records.
  • At least two completed independent reviewer assessments.
  • Reviewer comments and recommendations.
  • Editorial decisions and correspondence.
  • Revised manuscripts and author response documents.
  • Final acceptance or rejection decisions.

Reviewer identities and confidential records are protected in accordance with the journal's editorial policies.

10. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal concerning an editorial decision through the official editorial email. Appeals and complaints are handled fairly and confidentially, with independent editorial reassessment where appropriate.

11. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

Decisions must not be influenced by financial considerations, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, or the authors' identities.

Official Editorial Contact

Journal: Journal Interdisciplinary Health (JIH)

Publisher: Ilmiah Edukasi Indonesia

Email: admin_jih@edi.or.id

Publisher Website: https://edi.or.id

Journal Website: Journal Interdisciplinary Health

Journal Interdisciplinary Health | Peer Review Policy | Transparency and Best Practices in Scholarly Publishing