Review Process Policy

Review Process Policy

1. Overview

ELTIN Journal: Journal of English Language Teaching in Indonesia is a peer-reviewed academic journal published by IKIP Siliwangi, Indonesia. The journal applies a double-blind peer-review process to evaluate the quality, originality, relevance, and scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

The review process aims to ensure that published articles meet appropriate academic standards and contribute meaningfully to research in English language teaching, applied linguistics, literature, and language education.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the editor. During this stage, the editorial team evaluates whether the manuscript:

  • Fits the focus and scope of ELTIN Journal.
  • Meets the journal's submission requirements and author guidelines.
  • Demonstrates originality and an adequate scholarly contribution.
  • Presents an appropriate research design, methodology, and academic argument.
  • Meets the journal's requirements concerning language, formatting, and publication ethics.
  • Has been screened for text similarity using Turnitin or another appropriate similarity-checking tool.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected before external peer review.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise.

ELTIN Journal applies a double-blind review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process.

Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript and supplementary files do not unnecessarily disclose their identities. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based assessments of the manuscript.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts according to relevant scholarly criteria, including:

  1. Originality and contribution: The novelty, relevance, and potential contribution of the manuscript to the field.
  2. Research questions and objectives: The clarity and significance of the research problem, objectives, or theoretical argument.
  3. Literature review: The adequacy, relevance, and critical engagement with previous research.
  4. Methodology: The appropriateness and transparency of the research design, methods, instruments, data collection, and analysis.
  5. Results and discussion: The accuracy of the findings, quality of interpretation, and relationship between the results and existing literature.
  6. Conclusion and implications: The extent to which the conclusions are supported by the findings and contribute to the field.
  7. Academic writing and presentation: The clarity, organization, language quality, referencing, and compliance with the journal's author guidelines.
  8. Research and publication ethics: Compliance with ethical standards, appropriate citation, originality, and responsible reporting.

The criteria are applied according to the type and nature of the submitted manuscript.

5. Review Timeline

The peer-review process generally takes approximately four to eight weeks. However, the actual duration may vary depending on reviewer availability, the complexity of the manuscript, the need for additional review, and the time required for authors to complete revisions.

The editorial office communicates important updates and decisions to the corresponding author through the journal's online submission system or official correspondence channels.

6. Editorial Decisions

Following the review process, the editor considers the reviewers' comments and recommendations before making the final editorial decision.

The possible outcomes are:

a. Reject

The manuscript does not meet the journal's requirements for publication. Rejected manuscripts will not proceed to publication.

b. Resubmit for Review

The manuscript requires substantial revision and may be reconsidered after the authors address the reviewers' comments. A revised manuscript may undergo another round of peer review.

c. Accept with Revisions

The manuscript may be accepted subject to the completion of required minor or major revisions. The editor evaluates the revised manuscript to determine whether the requested changes have been adequately addressed.

d. Accept

The manuscript is accepted for publication without further substantive revisions, subject to any necessary production and editorial requirements.

The final decision rests with the editor, taking into account the reviewers' assessments, the journal's editorial policies, and the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

7. Revision and Resubmission

Authors receiving a revision decision must respond to the reviewers' comments carefully and systematically. A revised manuscript should be accompanied by a response document explaining how each comment has been addressed or providing a reasoned explanation when a suggestion has not been adopted.

Authors should return revised manuscripts within the deadline specified by the editorial office. Under the journal's current review-process guidance, manuscripts returned for revision may be held for a maximum of four weeks.

If authors require additional time, they should contact the editorial office before the deadline. Failure to return a revision within the specified period may affect the manuscript's continued processing.

8. Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibilities

All manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose unpublished manuscript content or use information obtained during the review process for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts impartially, maintain confidentiality, identify potential conflicts of interest, and notify the editor if they are unable to assess a manuscript objectively or within the agreed timeframe.

Editors must ensure that editorial decisions are fair, evidence-based, and free from inappropriate influence arising from authors' institutional affiliations, nationality, gender, personal relationships, or other irrelevant considerations.

9. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Where a conflict exists, the individual concerned should withdraw from the relevant review or decision-making process, and an appropriate alternative should be appointed.

Authors are also expected to disclose relevant conflicts of interest in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

10. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a significant factual error, procedural irregularity, or demonstrable misunderstanding of the manuscript may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office.

Appeals should include a clear explanation and supporting evidence. The editor or an appropriate editorial representative will review the appeal in accordance with the journal's policies. An appeal does not guarantee a change in the original decision.

11. Final Publication Decision

Acceptance for publication is determined by the editorial team after consideration of the peer-review reports and completion of the required editorial procedures.

The journal reserves the right to reject a manuscript at any stage if serious concerns arise regarding research integrity, plagiarism, ethical compliance, or the reliability of the reported findings.

ELTIN Journal is committed to maintaining a transparent, fair, confidential, and academically rigorous review process in support of responsible scholarly publishing.

Official Journal Website:
https://e-journal.stkipsiliwangi.ac.id/index.php/eltin/index

Existing Peer Review Process:
https://e-journal.stkipsiliwangi.ac.id/index.php/eltin/peerreviewprocess