Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan (JAK) applies a double-blind peer-review process. Authors do not know reviewer identities and reviewers do not know author identities. All editorial decisions are made by the Editor in Chief or an assigned editor based on academic merit, reviewer reports, ethical compliance, and the journal's scope.

Initial Editorial Screening

Every submission is screened for fit with the journal's scope, completeness of metadata and manuscript files, compliance with author guidelines, research integrity, and similarity. Manuscripts with a similarity result of 20 percent or more, evidence of plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabrication, falsification, or other serious ethical concerns may be declined before external review. A similarity percentage is assessed qualitatively; properly cited references and legitimate overlap are considered before a decision is made.

Reviewer Selection

Suitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers are selected based on subject competence, publication record, institutional diversity, availability, and absence of competing interests. A reviewer must decline an invitation where a financial, institutional, personal, collaborative, supervisory, or other competing interest may affect impartiality.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate originality and research gap, significance and contribution, methodological rigor, quality of data and analysis, interpretation and discussion, clarity of conclusions, ethical compliance, use of current and primary references, presentation, and conformity with the journal's style. Review reports should provide substantive, constructive, and evidence-based comments. Reviews limited only to grammar or layout are not sufficient for the scholarly assessment.

Review Timeline and Decision

Reviewers are normally asked to return a report within 14 days. Editors monitor the review process and may invite an additional reviewer when reports conflict, are incomplete, or require further expertise. Based on the reports, the editor may decide: accept, minor revisions, major revisions and resubmission for review, decline, or resubmit elsewhere. Acceptance is issued only after the manuscript has completed the required review and revision process.

Revision and Final Checks

Authors must submit a point-by-point response and a revised manuscript by the deadline set by the editor. Material revisions may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to another qualified reviewer. Before publication, the editorial team verifies final metadata, author affiliations, references, DOI assignment, author contribution, funding, competing-interest, data-availability, and AI-use statements.

Confidentiality and AI

Editors and reviewers treat manuscripts and review records as confidential. Reviewers must not use generative AI to analyse manuscripts, prepare review comments, or upload manuscript content to any AI system. Reviewers may not use unpublished information for personal advantage. Appeals or ethical concerns may be submitted to jak@unimal.ac.id and will be evaluated according to COPE guidance.