Peer Review Process

Each manuscript submitted to JAKUSI will be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the topic. If only two reviewers are assigned, the first reviewer's recommendation will be the primary consideration for the editorial decision.

Reviewers are given two weeks to complete each round of the review. Authors must revise their manuscripts in response to reviewer comments and clearly indicate the changes made.

Reviewer Selection
Reviewers are selected based on their reputation in international publications and academic expertise. The editorial team will send an invitation to each reviewer candidate. Once availability is confirmed, the editor creates a reviewer account and sends the manuscript through the Open Journal System (OJS).

The entire review process is conducted through a double-blind peer review, in which the identities of both the authors and the reviewers are kept confidential.

Rules for Reviewers
To maintain scientific integrity and uphold publication quality, reviewers are expected to:

  • Ensure the manuscript is within their field of expertise. If not, they should decline the invitation.

  • Adhere to the double-blind review process.

  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Complete the review within four weeks or notify the editor within one or two days if unable to complete the review.

  • Provide objective, constructive, and respectful feedback.

Double-Blind Review
The journal uses a double-blind review process. Authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the evaluation.

Conflict of Interest
Reviewers must not:

  • Work at the same institution as the author(s),

  • Have collaborated with the author(s) in the past,

  • Have any financial, professional, or personal relationship with the author(s).

If a conflict is identified, the reviewer must notify the editor immediately.

Evaluation Criteria
Reviewers will assess submissions based on the following:

  • Originality and novelty of the research,

  • Structure and coherence,

  • Theoretical and conceptual framework,

  • Methodological rigor,

  • Relevance and accuracy of findings,

  • Contribution to knowledge and practice,

  • Quality of academic writing and language,

  • Validity and clarity of tables and figures.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Review manuscripts objectively,

  • Provide clear and reasoned comments,

  • Help authors improve their manuscripts through constructive feedback,

  • Avoid revealing their identity in comments,

  • Provide a clear recommendation (accept, revise, or reject).

Required Manuscript Structure

  • Title

  • Abstract (including: Aim/Purpose, Methodology, Findings, Implications, Originality/Value)

  • Keywords

  • JEL Classification

  • Main Body (Introduction, Theoretical Background, Methodology, Findings and Discussion, Conclusion)

  • Acknowledgements (if any)

  • References (APA Style)

Reviewer Checklist
Reviewers should consider the following questions:

  • Is the manuscript suitable for JAKUSI’s scope and standards?

  • Is the structure and formatting appropriate?

  • Are the research questions or hypotheses clearly stated?

  • Are the methods appropriate and well explained?

  • Does the paper contribute to theory or practice?

  • Are the conclusions supported by the data?

  • Are the theoretical and practical implications clearly described?

  • Is the language clear, formal, and free from errors?

Plagiarism
If you suspect plagiarism or self-plagiarism, please report it to the editor immediately.

Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Ethical Standards
JAKUSI is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. Reviewers and authors must act in accordance with the journal’s Publication Ethics guidelines.