Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process
SIPAMANDAQ: Journal of Physics Education Research and Innovation
Double-Blind Peer Review

All manuscripts submitted to SIPAMANDAQ: Journal of Physics Education Research and Innovation undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and scientific contribution of published articles. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.

The peer review process consists of the following stages:

01
Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the Editorial Office conducts a preliminary evaluation to ensure that the manuscript:

  • falls within the scope of the journal;
  • complies with the journal's formatting and submission requirements;
  • meets the standards of academic writing;
  • passes plagiarism screening; and
  • satisfies basic ethical and scientific standards.
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected without external review.
02
Assignment to an Editor

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to an editor with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area. The assigned editor oversees the peer review process and makes recommendations based on reviewers' comments.
03
Double-Blind Peer Review
At least two independent reviewers

Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

✓ Originality and novelty ✓ Scientific quality
✓ Methodological rigor ✓ Clarity of presentation
✓ Validity of data analysis ✓ Relevance to the scope of the journal
✓ Significance of the findings
04
Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

Accept
Ready for publication
Minor Revision
Limited revisions required
Major Revision
Substantial revisions required
Reject
Not suitable for publication
If revisions are requested, authors should submit a revised manuscript together with a detailed response to reviewers' comments.
05
Final Decision

After the revised manuscript has been evaluated, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision regarding acceptance or rejection.

The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.
06
Publication

Accepted manuscripts undergo copyediting, proofreading, layout editing, and final author approval before publication.
Peer Review Workflow
Submission   →   Editorial Screening   →   Editor Assignment   →   Double-Blind Review   →   Editorial Decision   →   Final Decision   →   Publication
Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts except as necessary during the editorial process.

Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must decline handling or reviewing manuscripts in which they have financial, professional, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest that could affect their objectivity.

Review Timeline
4–8 Weeks
The journal aims to complete the peer review process within 4–8 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the quality of the submitted manuscript.
Ethical Review Practice

The peer review process is conducted in accordance with the ethical principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure fairness, transparency, confidentiality, and academic integrity.

Peer Review Process at a Glance
SIPAMANDAQ Peer Review Process