Peer Review Process
JPLT · JURNAL PESISIR DAN LAUT TROPIS
Peer Review Process
A structured editorial and peer review process supports the publication of scientific research and critical reviews in coastal and tropical marine sciences.
Double-Blind
Peer review model
At Least 2 Reviewers
Expert assessment of each manuscript
Editorial Decision
Final decision by the Editorial Team
REVIEW MODEL
Double-Blind Peer Review
Jurnal Pesisir dan Laut Tropis (JPLT) applies an initial editorial review followed by assessment by at least two reviewers. Under the double-blind model, author identities are concealed from reviewers and reviewer identities are concealed from authors. Reviewer comments are communicated to the authors for revision where necessary.
AUTHORS
Submit the manuscript and respond to review comments.
EDITORIAL TEAM
Coordinates assessment and communicates decisions.
REVIEWERS
Evaluate the manuscript and provide recommendations.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
CRITERION A
Relevance and Scientific Contribution
Relevance to coastal and tropical marine sciences, a clear research question, and a contribution to the understanding or management of marine systems.
CRITERION B
Research Design and Methods
Suitability of sampling design, field or laboratory procedures, analytical methods, and the information needed to understand and reproduce the study.
CRITERION C
Data Quality and Analysis
Consistency of reported data, appropriate statistical or other analytical approaches, suitable treatment of uncertainty, and conclusions supported by results.
CRITERION D
Scientific Context and References
A clear connection to relevant literature, accurate citations, and a discussion that places the findings in their ecological, oceanographic, or other marine context.
CRITERION E
Research Integrity and Ethics
Honest reporting and appropriate ethical considerations, including permissions or approvals relevant to the research, organisms, sites, or participants involved.
CRITERION F
Clarity and Presentation
A coherent manuscript structure, readable language, informative tables and figures, and compliance with the journal's author guidelines.
REVIEW WORKFLOW
STEP 01
Manuscript Submission
Authors submit a manuscript through the journal's OJS system and follow the JPLT author guidelines.
STEP 02
Initial Editorial Screening
The section editor checks the submission and its compliance with the author guidelines. Authors may be asked to correct the manuscript before further assessment.
STEP 03
Editorial Assessment and Reviewer Assignment
The Editorial Team assesses the revised submission and forwards manuscripts proceeding to peer review to at least two reviewers.
STEP 04
Double-Blind Expert Review
Reviewers assess the manuscript and provide comments and recommendations for consideration by the Editorial Team.
STEP 05
Author Revision
Authors revise the manuscript in response to the comments communicated by the editor. Further assessment may be required before a final decision.
STEP 06
Final Editorial Decision
The Editorial Team considers the reviewers' recommendations and decides whether to publish, postpone publication pending further work, or reject the manuscript.
STEP 07
Preparation and Publication
Accepted manuscripts proceed to preparation and layout. Authors confirm the layout results, after which the section editor publishes the accepted article.
PROCESSING SCHEDULE
The following time allocations describe the manuscript-handling stages. They should not be added together as a guaranteed publication time because some steps are conditional on the editorial decision.
| No. | Handling stage | Time allocation |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Initial submission waiting period | 3 days |
| 2 | Section editor checks compliance with author guidelines | 3 days |
| 3 | Author revises the manuscript to meet author guidelines | 7 days |
| 4 | Editorial Team reviews the revised manuscript | 7 days |
| 5 | Notification of editorial rejection, where applicable | 3 days |
| 6 | Referral to reviewers for further assessment | Not specified |
| 7 | Peer review, described as two reviews | 30 days |
| 8 | Final decision by the Editorial Team | 10 days |
| 9 | Preparation of accepted articles for publication | More than 7 days |
| 10 | Author confirmation of layout results | 3 days |
| 11 | Publication of accepted articles by section editors | Not specified |
EDITORIAL OUTCOMES
Publish
The manuscript is accepted and proceeds to publication preparation.
Postpone / Further Revision
Additional work or revision is required before publication can proceed.
Reject
The Editorial Team decides that the manuscript will not be published.
The final decision rests with the Editorial Team, taking into account the reviewers' recommendations.
CONFIDENTIALITY AND REVIEW ETHICS
Confidential Handling
Manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers should not share them or use unpublished findings for personal advantage.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should inform the editor of interests or relationships that could affect impartial assessment.
Constructive Assessment
Comments should focus on the scientific work, be supported by clear reasoning, and help authors improve their manuscript.
Integrity Concerns
Concerns about plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unreliable data should be brought to the editor's attention for consideration.
JURNAL PESISIR DAN LAUT TROPIS
Scientific Quality Through Peer Review
Prepare your manuscript using the JPLT author guidelines and submit it through the journal system.
Submit a Manuscript Author Guidelines
