Peer Review Process
The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated in the office, whether it is suitable for JRAP (Jurnal Riset Akuntansi dan Perpajakan) focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similiarity score by using Turnitin.
Review Process:
1. Author submit the manuscript
2. Editor Evaluation [some manuscripts are rejected or returned before the review process]
3. Blind peer review process
4. Editor Decision
5. Confirmation to the authors
This journal uses double blind review, which means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process.
Reviewer Guideline
Components and evaluation indicator Reviewers assessment are described in the following Table:
|
No |
Component |
Evaluation Indicator of reviewer |
|
1 |
Title |
Effectiveness, Specification and clarity |
|
2 |
Abstract (in English) |
Complete and describe the essence of article |
|
3 |
Keywords |
Describing the essential concept of article |
|
4 |
Introduction (background, Objective or scope, literature Review) |
Up-to-date, originality, relevance of the Topic, compatibility of the important reason of the research objective |
|
5 |
Methods |
Accuracy, Specification, and clarity |
|
6 |
Results (Analysis and Synthetic) |
Analysis acuteness |
|
7 |
Discussion (Interpretation) |
Up-to-date finding, relevance to the interrelated researches, and the scientific contribution effect of finding /idea to the development of science |
|
8 |
Conclusion |
Logical, valid, brief, and clear |
|
9 |
Suggestion |
For practical action, development of new theory, and next/advanced research |
|
10 |
Bibliography |
Degree of up-to-date and the reference of primary book sources. Rules: at least 80% of the journals or the interrelated scientific researches. |
