- Focus and Scope
- Peer Review Process
- Open Access Policy
- Author Guidelines
- Copyright Notice
- Author Fees
- Editorial Team
- International Peer-Reviewers List
- Publication Ethics
- Abstracting & Indexing
- Policy of Screening for Plagiarism
- Request Conference Collaboration
- Registration Candidate Editorial Board & Reviewer
- Reviewer Acknowledgment
- About this Publishing System
What is Peer Review?
Peer review is a system consisting frameworks and stages of manuscript assessment before publication. The aim of a peer review process is to determine the submitted manuscripts’ originality, validity, and significance. Each stages will assist journal editors to decide the manuscript’s qualification to publication.
How does it work?
The peer review process starts after a submission has fulfilled the assessment qualification. If a manuscript passed the assessment, the editorial team will proceed by selecting potential peer reviewers. These peer reviewers are selected by considering the field of research aligned with the manuscript. Afterwards, the peer reviewers will make recommendations to encourage the manuscript’s quality.
There are four main types of peer reviewer in general:
Single blind reviewer means only the single party knows the information of author; the reviewers know the names of author whereas the authors do not have knowledge of their reviewers, unless the reviewer chooses to sign their report.
Double blind peer review means both parties in the journal do not have knowledge of each other; the reviewers do not have information on the authors, and the authors do not have information on their reviewers.
- Open peer
In the open peer review, the authors are both aware of each others’ information. The reviewers are aware of the authors’ information and the authors are aware of the peer reviewers’ information.
- Transparent peer
Transparent peer means that the names of the authors are open for the authors to see, however the authors do not have knowledge on the reviewers that specifically review their manuscript unless the reviewer choose to sign the report. If the manuscript passed the reviewers’ assessment, the reports are published alongside the article anonymously.
The Journal of Cepalo uses double blind peer reviewer in the manuscript assessment. However, adjustments are possible according to the manuscripts’ specific interests and necessities
Why do peer review?
Peer review is an essential step of a scientific publication that confirms the manuscript validation. Peer reviewers are volunteers who voluntarily encourages authors to improve their manuscript through the process of review. The process of peer review accommodates manuscript as follows:
Peer reviews could provide author on how to complete gaps in their manuscript by additional explanation and description.
Peer reviewers could guide authors on how to improve the clarity of a manuscript.
Peer reviewers also recognize your paper’s relevance as a contribution in other fields.
All submitted manuscript in CEPALO must be aligned to the focus and scope and author guidelines of this journal. The submitted manuscript must fulfill requirements of novelty appropriation regarding focus and scope of the journal. The manuscripts in this journal are provided in English. For Authors who’s native language is not English are suggested to check their manuscript thoroughly. Submitted manuscript should be free from plagiarism content. Authors are recommended to check their manuscript plagiarism in Policy of Screening for Plagiarism. The submitted manuscript to this journal will be peer-reviewed by at least 2 peer reviewed at least 2 (two) expert reviewers. The final decision for the manuscript acceptance is determined by the Editor in Chief together with the Editorial Board.
Cepalo will publish the only paper strictly following Cepalo guidelines and manuscript preparation. Those papers are read by editorial members (upon the field of specialization) and will be screened by Managing Editor to meet necessary criteria of Cepalo publication. Manuscripts will be sent to two peer-reviewers based on their historical experience in reviewing a manuscript or based on their field of specialization. Cepalo has reviewing forms in order to keep same items reviewed by two reviewers. The editorial board will make a decision upon the reviewers' comments or advice. Reviewers will give their assessment on originality, clarity of presentation, contribution to the field/science, Cepalo has four kinds of decisions:
- Accepted, as it is
- Accepted by Minor Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
- Accepted by Major Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
- Rejected (generally, on grounds of an outside of scope and aim, major technical description problems, lack of clarity of presentation)
For checking Plagiarism, Cepalo Editorial Board will screen plagiarism manually on the Title and Abstract of the manuscript by using Google engine. If it is found plagiarism indication, the editorial board will reject the manuscript immediately.
Before publishing, it is required to obtain written confirmation from authors in order to acquire copyrights for papers published in the journal. Authors must sign the Transfer Copy Right form as follows: The undersigned hereby transfer any and all rights in and to the paper including without limitation all copyrights to Cepalo. The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required. The undersigned represents that he/she has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. This agreement is to be signed by at least one of the authors who have obtained the assent of the co-author(s) where applicable.
Cepalo uses the Double-Blind Review system, where the reviewer and author do not know each other's names and identities. Then, the Editorial Board will give a decision based on the results of the reviewer’s review. Reviewers will provide opinions toward the related article manuscript based on authenticity, clarity, and contributions to the field of science.