Peer Review Process

Every manuscript submitted to the editor will be selected through an initial review process by the Editorial Board. Then, the article will be given to the peer reviewers and will continue to double-blind peer-review process. After that, the article will be returned to the author for revision. It takes a very long time before publishing a quality article. Peer Reviewers will assess the substantial and technical aspects of the article. Peer Reviewers working for the Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan and contains research in the field of The journal publishes original papers in fields that include Engineering but are not limited to, Electrical Engineering and Applied Sciences, focusing mainly in the field of Sustainable Energy, Electrical Control System and Electrical Power System.  Our publication will contribute towards new exploration of knowledge and state-of-the-art technology for scholars and industrial professionals in these fields. 

The article entered will be peer-reviewed. They are vastly experienced in managing prestigious journals and have a broad track record of publications in reputable international journals.

The suitability of manuscripts for publication in the Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan is judged by peer reviewers and the Editorial Board. All the review processes are conducted in double-blind review. The Chief Editor handles all correspondence with the author and makes the final decision as to whether the paper is recommended for acceptance, rejection, or needs to be returned to the author for revision.

  1. When do submission of a manuscript, the author should fulfil the requirements mentioned in the Submission Preparation Checklist.  Together with the manuscript, authors also should attach an AuthorAgreement Declaration. The author also should follow the manuscript format determined by the Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan (Article Template).
  2. Once, the manuscript passes the administrative screening, the Chief Editor and Associate Editor will evaluate the submitted papers on prequalification review for suitability of further review process.
  3. In this step, a manuscript could be rejected without a review process, due to three general reasons: The topic of the manuscript does not fit in the Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan scope and may be better suited for publication elsewhere. The substance of the manuscripts does not meet Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan standards; the data may be incomplete; the methodology used is not appropriate; lack of novelties and no advancement of the existing knowledge; or there is no consistency among objectives, research design/method, evidence, and conclusion. The manuscripts are not written following the Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan guidelines mentioned in Instruction to Authors.
  1. Once the manuscript meets the prequalification requirement, the manuscripts will be sent to qualified peer reviewers selected by the Chief Editor and Associate Editors.
  2. The peer reviewers should examine the manuscript and return it with their recommendations, comments, and suggestions to the Chief Editor within 3 weeks of the review request being accepted.  In case, one of the peer reviewers recommends rejection, and on the contrary, another reviewer recommends revision, the Chief Editor will ask a third reviewer or Board Editors to decide the acceptance or rejection of the paper.
  3. Papers needing revision will be returned to the authors, and the author must return the revised manuscript to the Chief Editor via e-journal of Journal of Jurnal Energi dan Ketenagalistrikan within 3 weeks since notice/email from the Chief Editor in accepted. Manuscripts that exceed the revision deadline will be withdrawn. Authors may request for extension from the Chief Editor before the revision expires.
  4. For a manuscript in which a peer reviewer requests a revision check made by the authors, the revised manuscript will be sent to the peer reviewers upon request.  In this step, the peer reviewers should re-examine the revised manuscript and return it with their recommendation, comment, and suggestion to the Chief Editor within 3 weeks of the review request being accepted.
  5. Further, the Chief Editor will send the revised manuscript to the Associate Editors to check whether the manuscript is revised as suggested by peer reviewers.
  6. Associate Editors could give a recommendation to the Chief Editor that the manuscript should return to the authors, should be accepted, or should be rejected within 2 weeks.
  7. In this step, manuscripts could be rejected if authors do not revise the manuscripts as suggested by reviewers and/or Editorial Board, or do not give proper response/rebuttal against the suggestions.
  8. If the manuscript is rejected, the author will be notified by the Chief Editor with a statement of reasons for rejection. The author may appeal to the Chief Editor if he/she believes an unfair judgment has been made which encloses the authors’ reasons. The Chief Editor will review and discuss the reasons with the Associate Editor responsible for the manuscript, and later decide whether to accept or deny the appeal.
  9. After acceptance by the Chief Editors, the manuscript is forwarded to the technical editor to be layout for an editorial board meeting. The Chief Editor would send an acceptance letter announcing the publication issue attached with a manuscript reprint to authors.