All academic journals published under the auspices of Universitas Islam Darussalam (UID) Ciamis adhere to strict quality assurance, transparency, and publication ethics. Peer review is fundamental to safeguarding scholarly integrity, filtering sub-standard work, and ensuring the scientific rigor and validity of published research.

1. Review Policy and Model

Double-Blind Peer Review

All journals published by Universitas Islam Darussalam (UID) Ciamis implement a Double-Blind Peer Review model:

• The identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.

• The identities and affiliations of the authors are concealed from the reviewers.

• Reviewers and authors must ensure that submitted documents and supplementary files are properly anonymized (removing author names, institutional affiliations, and self-identifying references in metadata or text).

2. End-to-End Workflow: The Peer Review Process

Our journals utilize the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform for submission tracking, editorial assignment, and peer review management. The standard editorial and review trajectory proceeds as follows:

Stage 1: Initial Editorial Evaluation (Desk Review)

Upon submission via OJS:

1. Technical & Guideline Compliance: The Editorial Assistant checks the manuscript for conformity with formatting rules, word count, referencing style, and proper anonymization.

2. Scope & Originality Screening: The Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor verifies whether the paper fits the journal's Focus and Scope and conducts a plagiarism check (e.g., via Turnitin).

3. Desk Decision: Manuscripts that fail standard originality thresholds, deviate substantially from the scope, or exhibit severe methodological flaws are desk rejected or returned for pre-review revisions. Submissions meeting the baseline criteria proceed to peer review.

Stage 2: Reviewer Selection and Invitation

• Each manuscript is assigned to at least two (2) independent, qualified experts matched according to subject-matter expertise and relevant research keywords.

• Potential reviewers receive an invitation via OJS containing the manuscript title and abstract.

Stage 3: Reviewer Acceptance or Decline

• Declining an Invitation: If an invited reviewer lacks the time, finds the topic outside their core expertise, or identifies a potential conflict of interest, they should click Decline immediately in OJS. Prompt declining prevents unnecessary delays in the editorial cycle.

• Accepting an Invitation: Upon accepting, reviewers agree to return their evaluation within the designated review period (typically 2 to 4 weeks). Reviewers must notify the handling editor promptly if unforeseen delays arise.

Stage 4: Evaluation and Recommendation

Reviewers access the anonymized manuscript via their OJS Reviewer Centre, complete the standard review rubric, provide detailed qualitative comments, and select one of the following recommendations:

1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is acceptable in its present form.

2. Revisions Required (Minor Revisions): The manuscript requires minor adjustments before publication.

3. Resubmit for Review (Major Revisions): Substantial theoretical, methodological, or empirical revisions are needed; a second round of review will be conducted.

4. Resubmit Elsewhere: The topic is valid but better suited to a different specialized journal.

5. Decline Submission (Reject): The manuscript has critical flaws, lacks originality/scientific merit, or does not meet publication standards.

6. See Comments: Narrative guidance when a standardized recommendation is insufficient.

Stage 5: Editorial Decision and Notification

• The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor, informed by the reviewers' evaluations and recommendations.

• When reviewer assessments diverge significantly, the Editor-in-Chief may invite a third reviewer or consult a member of the Editorial Board before issuing a final decision.

• Authors receive the editorial decision accompanied by synthesized, constructive feedback from the reviewers.

3. Reviewer Code of Conduct and Core Principles

All peer reviewers serving UID Ciamis journals must adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines:

1. Expertise & Timeliness: Only accept review invitations within your area of expertise that you can complete within the agreed timeframe.

2. Confidentiality: Treat the manuscript and all supplementary materials as strictly confidential. Do not share, distribute, quote, or use any part of an unpublished manuscript for personal or professional benefit.

3. Conflict of Interest (COI): Immediately disclose any potential conflicts of interest—whether financial, institutional, personal, or collaborative—and recuse yourself from the evaluation if objectivity cannot be guaranteed.

4. Constructive & Objective Critique: Provide fair, rigorous, unbiased, and constructive feedback. Avoid hostile, derogatory, or dismissive remarks. Frame critiques with clear academic reasoning and constructive suggestions for improvement.

5. Ethical Vigilance: Alert the editor immediately if you suspect plagiarism, redundant/duplicate publication, data fabrication/falsification, or improper citation manipulation.

4. Manuscript Referral Policy

To optimize publication efficiency across journals managed under Universitas Islam Darussalam (UID) Ciamis:

• High-quality manuscripts that fall outside the specific scope of one journal may, with the author's prior consent, be referred to another suitable UID journal.

• When a referred manuscript is transferred, previous peer-review reports and editorial insights may be shared with the receiving editor to accelerate the editorial evaluation, while retaining the receiving editor's right to solicit additional reviews if necessary.

5. Benefits of Reviewing for UID Journals

Universitas Islam Darussalam (UID) Ciamis values the dedication of its peer reviewers. In recognition of their scholarly contribution, reviewers benefit from:

• Academic Contribution: Direct involvement in upholding scientific rigor and advancing research quality in Islamic studies, social sciences, and education.

• Continuous Learning: Exposure to cutting-edge research trends, novel methodologies, and current debates before publication.

• Formal Recognition: Official electronic Reviewer Certificates, public acknowledgment in annual reviewer indexes, and verified review credits (e.g., via Web of Science / ORCID integration).

• Editorial Opportunities: High-performing and reliable reviewers are prioritized for invitations to join the international Editorial Advisory Boards of UID journals.