Reviewers Guidelines

Al-Iqtisod: Ekonomi Syariah

Introduction

The Editorial Board of Al-Iqtisod: Ekonomi Syariah greatly appreciates the valuable contribution of reviewers in maintaining the quality, credibility, and academic integrity of the journal. Reviewers play a crucial role in evaluating the originality, significance, methodological rigor, and scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

The journal applies a Double-Blind Peer Review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review process.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and professional evaluations.

  • Maintain confidentiality of all manuscripts received for review.

  • Complete reviews within the specified timeframe.

  • Identify relevant literature not cited by the authors.

  • Notify the editor of any potential conflicts of interest.

  • Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or research misconduct.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscripts with others.

  • Use unpublished information for personal research.

  • Discuss manuscript contents outside the review process.

Confidentiality must be maintained before, during, and after the review process.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline review invitations if they have any conflict of interest arising from:

  • Personal relationships.

  • Professional collaborations.

  • Institutional affiliations.

  • Financial interests.

  • Competitive relationships with the authors.

Any potential conflict should be disclosed to the Editor immediately.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers should assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

1. Relevance to Journal Scope

Evaluate whether the manuscript aligns with the aims and scope of Al-Iqtisod: Ekonomi Syariah, including topics such as:

  • Islamic Economics

  • Islamic Finance

  • Islamic Banking

  • Islamic Accounting

  • Islamic Capital Markets

  • Zakat and Waqf

  • Islamic Entrepreneurship

  • Halal Industry

  • Islamic Business Ethics

  • Islamic Social Finance

2. Originality and Novelty

Assess whether:

  • The study offers new insights.

  • The manuscript contributes to the advancement of knowledge.

  • The research question is innovative and relevant.

Questions to consider:

  • Is the topic original?

  • Does the manuscript provide significant academic value?

  • Does it contribute to existing literature?

3. Literature Review

Evaluate whether:

  • Relevant literature has been adequately reviewed.

  • Recent references have been incorporated.

  • Theoretical foundations are clearly established.

Questions to consider:

  • Is the literature review comprehensive?

  • Are key references included?

  • Is the research gap clearly identified?

4. Research Methodology

Assess:

  • Research design appropriateness.

  • Sampling methods.

  • Data collection procedures.

  • Analytical techniques.

  • Validity and reliability.

Questions to consider:

  • Is the methodology clearly described?

  • Is it suitable for the research objectives?

  • Can the study be replicated?

5. Results and Discussion

Evaluate whether:

  • Results are clearly presented.

  • Findings address the research objectives.

  • Discussion is supported by evidence.

  • Findings are linked to existing literature.

Questions to consider:

  • Are the findings clearly explained?

  • Does the discussion provide meaningful interpretation?

  • Are conclusions supported by the data?

6. Writing Quality

Assess:

  • Clarity of language.

  • Logical organization.

  • Grammar and spelling.

  • Academic writing style.

Questions to consider:

  • Is the manuscript well structured?

  • Is the language understandable and professional?

  • Are tables and figures appropriately presented?

7. References

Review whether:

  • References are relevant and up to date.

  • Citations are properly formatted.

  • Sources are credible and scholarly.

Questions to consider:

  • Are most references from reputable journals?

  • Are recent studies adequately cited?

  • Is the citation style consistent?

Reviewer Recommendations

At the end of the review, reviewers should select one of the following recommendations:

Accept

The manuscript is suitable for publication without further revision.

Minor Revisions

The manuscript requires minor improvements before publication.

Major Revisions

Substantial revisions are necessary before reconsideration.

Resubmit for Review

The manuscript requires extensive modifications and should undergo another round of peer review.

Reject

The manuscript does not meet the journal's standards for publication.

Constructive Feedback

Reviewers are encouraged to:

  • Provide detailed comments.

  • Clearly identify strengths and weaknesses.

  • Suggest specific improvements.

  • Focus on improving manuscript quality.

  • Avoid personal criticism of authors.

Comments should be respectful, professional, and evidence-based.

Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers should immediately inform the Editor if they identify:

  • Plagiarism.

  • Duplicate publication.

  • Data fabrication.

  • Data falsification.

  • Ethical concerns involving research participants.

  • Citation manipulation.

  • Authorship disputes.

Review Timeline

Reviewers are generally expected to:

Activity Time Allocation
Accept/Decline Invitation 3–5 Days
Complete Review 14–21 Days
Re-review Revised Manuscript 7–14 Days

If additional time is needed, reviewers should contact the Editorial Office.

Reviewer Evaluation Form

Score Each Criterion

Criteria Score (1–5)
Relevance to Scope ☐
Originality ☐
Literature Review ☐
Methodology ☐
Data Analysis ☐
Discussion ☐
Conclusion ☐
References ☐
Writing Quality ☐

Overall Recommendation

☐ Accept

☐ Minor Revisions

☐ Major Revisions

☐ Resubmit for Review

☐ Reject

Acknowledgement

The Editorial Board sincerely appreciates the valuable time, expertise, and commitment of reviewers in supporting the publication of high-quality research and advancing scholarship in Islamic Economics and Finance.

Journal: Al-Iqtisod: Ekonomi Syariah
Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review
Publication Ethics: COPE Guidelines
Publisher: Sekolah Tinggi Ekonomi Syariah (STES) Tunas Palapa.