Reviewers Guidelines

DHARMA ABDITAMA : Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other to ensure objectivity during the evaluation process. Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the quality and credibility of scientific publications in this journal.

1.Reviewer Criteria

  • Possesses expertise in a field relevant to the focus and scope of this journal.
  • Has a proven track record of relevant scientific publications.
  • Willing to provide an objective, constructive, and ethically sound review.
  • Committed to completing the review within the designated timeframe.

2.Reviewer Responsibilities

  • Evaluate the manuscript objectively and provide constructive feedback.
  • Do not use any information from the manuscript for personal gain.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of the reviewed manuscript.
  • Disclose any potential conflict of interest prior to accepting the review assignment.

3.Review Process

a.Invitation to Review

  • Reviewers will receive an invitation from the editorial team via email.
  • Reviewers may accept or decline the invitation based on their expertise and availability.
  • If declining, please confirm promptly.

b.Initial Evaluation

  • Ensure no conflict of interest with the author(s).
  • Check if the article fits the journal’s focus and scope.
  • If the manuscript does not meet the minimum quality standards, the reviewer may recommend desk rejection.

c.In-Depth Review

Reviewers are expected to assess the manuscript based on the following aspects:

  • Scientific Quality
  • Methodology
  • Results and Discussion
  • References and Citations

d.Reviewer Recommendations

After completing the review, the reviewer should choose one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revision
  • Accept with major revision
  • Reject

e.Comments for Authors and Editors

  • Provide clear, objective, and constructive comments for the authors.
  • Use polite and professional language.
  • If shortcomings or errors are identified, include suggestions for improvement.

4.Reviewer Ethics

  • Confidentiality – Do not share or discuss the manuscript with others.
  • Objectivity – Avoid personal bias toward the author or research topic.
  • Plagiarism and Redundancy – Report any indication of plagiarism or duplicate publication.
  • Conflict of Interest – If a conflict exists, inform the editor immediately.

5.Review Deadline

Reviewers are given 14 to 21 days to complete the review. If additional time is needed, please contact the editor as soon as possible.