Peer Review Process

Journal of State Public Policy (JSPP) employs a strictly anonymous Double-Blind Peer Review system. This means that the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the author, and the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers throughout the review process.

1. Submission and Initial Screening (Desk Review)

Upon receipt of a manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated Section Editor conducts an initial compliance check (Desk Review) within 1–2 weeks.

The manuscript may be "Desk Rejected" without external review if:

  • It does not fall within the Focus and Scope of the journal.

  • It fails to meet the formatting standards outlined in the Author Guidelines.

  • The similarity index (plagiarism check via Turnitin/iThenticate) exceeds 20%.

  • It lacks sufficient academic merit or contributes significantly to existing knowledge.

2. Appointment of Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two (2) independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are selected based on their specific expertise, publication history, and lack of conflict of interest with the authors.

  • Reviewer Invitation: Selected reviewers are sent an invitation and must respond within 1 week.

  • Review Period: Once accepted, reviewers are typically given 4 weeks to complete their evaluation.

3. The Double-Blind Review

To ensure impartiality, the manuscript sent to reviewers is anonymized (no author names or affiliations). Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on the following criteria:

  • Originality: Is the work novel and does it add value to the field of state policy?

  • Methodology: Is the research design sound, rigorous, and appropriate?

  • Theoretical Framework: Is the theoretical underpinning robust and relevant?

  • Analysis: Are the results clearly presented and the discussion logical?

  • Relevance: Does the paper address current issues in Indonesian or global public policy?

  • Clarity: Is the writing clear, concise, and grammatically correct (US English)?

4. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers submit their detailed comments and one of the following recommendations to the Editor:

  1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is acceptable for publication in its current form (rare).

  2. Revisions Required (Minor): The manuscript requires minor corrections (e.g., formatting, clarification of minor points) before acceptance.

  3. Resubmit for Review (Major): The manuscript has potential but requires significant rewriting, additional data analysis, or structural changes. It will undergo a second round of review.

  4. Decline Submission: The manuscript is flawed, lacks originality, or is unsuitable for the journal.

5. Editorial Decision

The Section Editor collates the reviews and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision.

  • If the two reviewers have conflicting opinions (e.g., one "Accept" and one "Reject"), a third reviewer may be appointed to break the tie.

6. Revision and Final Acceptance

  • Notification: The author is notified of the decision via email, including the anonymized reviewer comments.

  • Revision Timeline: Authors typically have 2–4 weeks to submit their revised manuscript along with a "Response to Reviewers" letter detailing how they addressed each point.

  • Final Proof: Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes copyediting and layout. The author receives a final proof (galley) for approval before publication.

7. Timeline

The entire process, from submission to the final decision, typically takes 8–12 weeks. However, this timeline may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.