Dinamika Penelitian: Media Komunikasi Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan applies a rigorous double-anonymous external peer-review process to ensure the originality, academic quality, methodological reliability, ethical integrity, and socio-religious relevance of all published manuscripts. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the evaluation process. All submissions, reviews, revisions, and editorial decisions are managed through the journal’s online submission system.
Every submitted manuscript is initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor. This preliminary screening examines the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, originality, scholarly contribution, methodological quality, language clarity, structure, reference quality, similarity-check results, and compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and publication ethics.
Manuscripts that fall outside the scope of Islam, Muslim societies, socio-religious studies, community development, community empowerment, social transformation, or related interdisciplinary fields may be rejected without external review. Manuscripts may also be desk-rejected when they lack sufficient scholarly contribution, contain serious methodological weaknesses, show indications of plagiarism or duplicate submission, or fail to meet the journal’s basic submission requirements.
Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent external reviewers with relevant academic expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their knowledge of the manuscript’s subject area, theoretical framework, research methodology, and socio-religious context.
External reviewers must not have the same institutional affiliation as the authors, recent co-authorship or research collaboration with the authors, supervisory relationships, personal relationships, financial interests, or other conflicts that may affect impartial judgment. Members of the editorial board may only serve as reviewers when they possess highly specific expertise and have no conflict of interest. In such cases, they must not be involved in the final editorial decision.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the clarity and significance of the research problem, relevance to the journal’s scope, originality of contribution, adequacy of theoretical and empirical literature, appropriateness of the methodology, transparency of data collection and analysis, consistency between findings and conclusions, ethical compliance, and quality of academic writing.
For manuscripts based on community service, participatory action research, community empowerment, digital ethnography, policy engagement, or field-based socio-religious studies, reviewers are also asked to assess whether the manuscript clearly explains the social context, participant or community involvement, ethical safeguards, analytical procedures, and scholarly contribution beyond descriptive reporting.
Reviewers should provide constructive, evidence-based, respectful, and academically justified comments. Recommendations to add references must be based solely on scholarly relevance and must not be intended to increase citations to the reviewer, the journal, an institution, or a particular author.
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts, review reports, author responses, and editorial correspondence. Unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process must not be shared with unauthorized individuals or used for personal research, professional advantage, or financial benefit.
Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review invitation. They should decline the invitation if they cannot provide an objective and timely review.
Reviewers must inform the editor when they identify suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, unethical research involving human participants or communities, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other potential violations of research integrity.
The journal aims to complete the first round of external peer review within four to eight weeks after a manuscript is assigned to reviewers. The review period may be extended when additional expertise is required, reviewers become unavailable, conflicting reviewer reports need clarification, or substantial methodological and ethical issues must be examined.
Authors will be informed through the online submission system if significant delays occur. The journal does not guarantee acceptance or publication within a specific period because the duration of the process depends on the quality of the manuscript, reviewer availability, and the extent of revisions required.
After considering the reviewers’ reports and the editor’s academic assessment, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:
Accept without revision;
Accept with minor revisions;
Reconsider after major revisions;
Resubmit for a new round of review; or
Reject.
Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the responsible editor based on the manuscript’s scholarly quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal’s scope, reviewer reports, and author responses.
When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the editor may request clarification from reviewers, appoint an additional independent reviewer, or make a reasoned editorial decision based on the available evidence.
Authors receiving a revision decision must submit a revised manuscript and a detailed response-to-reviewers document. The response must explain how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed. When authors do not follow a recommendation, they must provide a clear academic justification.
Revised manuscripts must clearly indicate substantial changes. Manuscripts requiring major revision may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to additional reviewers. Submission of a revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.
The editor may reject a revised manuscript when authors fail to address major theoretical, methodological, ethical, analytical, or presentation concerns adequately.
The journal pays particular attention to ethical issues in socio-religious and community-based research. Authors must ensure that research involving human participants, religious communities, vulnerable groups, digital communities, family settings, schools, community organizations, or local institutions is conducted ethically and responsibly.
When ethical concerns arise, the editorial office may request additional information, including ethics approval, informed-consent procedures, anonymized data, interview protocols, field notes, research instruments, community permission, or other supporting documents. Manuscripts may be rejected or withdrawn from the review process when authors fail to provide adequate ethical clarification.
Research-integrity concerns will be handled in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics, plagiarism, correction, retraction, and withdrawal policies.
Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose manuscript content, reviewer identities, author identities, editorial correspondence, or unpublished findings outside the formal editorial process.
Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts, research data, interview excerpts, field notes, or supporting materials to public generative artificial intelligence platforms or external services that do not guarantee confidentiality and data protection.
Special care must be taken when manuscripts contain sensitive information about religious identity, family life, local communities, community conflicts, vulnerable participants, or identifiable socio-religious practices.
Editors must withdraw from handling manuscripts when they have an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest. Such manuscripts will be reassigned to another qualified editor who has no relationship with the authors or their institutions.
Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or individuals closely affiliated with the journal will undergo the same editorial and peer-review standards as other submissions. They will be managed by an independent editor and evaluated by external reviewers who have no conflict of interest.
Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and ethical compliance. Decisions are not influenced by nationality, institutional affiliation, academic status, gender, religion, political views, personal relationships, or commercial considerations.
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or ethical error affected the review process. Appeals must be submitted in writing, clearly identify the contested decision, respond specifically to the reviewers’ and editor’s comments, and provide relevant scholarly evidence.
Appeals based solely on disagreement with academic judgment will not normally be considered. Whenever possible, appeals will be examined by an editor who was not directly involved in the original decision.
Complaints concerning peer-review conduct, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, editorial delay, inappropriate communication, discrimination, or publication ethics will be handled fairly, confidentially, and proportionately.
All manuscripts must be submitted through the official Dinamika Penelitian online submission system. Reviewer invitations, review reports, author revisions, editorial decisions, and correspondence must also be managed through the system to ensure transparency, traceability, confidentiality, and proper documentation.
Manuscripts sent through personal email, messaging applications, or other unofficial channels will not enter the formal peer-review process.
The peer-review process is guided by the journal’s publication ethics and by relevant international principles of responsible scholarly publishing, including the COPE Guidance and Tools and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.
Focus and Scope Peer Review Process Publication Ethics Generative AI Policy Plagiarism CheckAbstracting and Indexing Open Access Policy Author Fees Copyright Notice Article Retraction Withdrawal of Manuscript Appeals and Complain Privacy Statement Disclaimer
Dinamika Penelitian published by LP2M UIN Sayyid Ali Rahmatullah Tulungagung, Jl. Mayor Sujadi Timur No. 46 is under license of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
Copyright © 2020 Dinamika Penelitian: Media Komunikasi Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan, ISSN: 1412-2669 (p) | 2549-4244 (e) Paltform & Workflow by OJS/PKP | Statistik Kunjungan
