Peer Reviewer Policy

Madinah: Jurnal Studi Islam applies a peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of every manuscript submitted to the journal.

The journal implements a single-blind peer-review system. In this system, the identities of the reviewers are not disclosed to the authors, while the reviewers may be aware of the authors' identities. Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject area. This system is intended to maintain confidentiality, encourage objective feedback, and ensure a fair evaluation process based on the scholarly merit of the manuscript.

A. Initial Editorial Screening (Two-Stage Process)
All newly submitted manuscripts undergo a two-stage initial editorial screening:

1. Zero Gate Screening (1-7 days)
The editorial team checks the manuscript's compliance with the following 4-Pillar criteria:

No    Criteria    Requirement
1    Language    The entire manuscript must be written in English
2    Abstract    Bilingual abstract (English and Indonesian), 150-300 words
3    Community-Based Scope    Must engage with specific Muslim communities (coastal, urban, or inland)
4    Novelty    The topic must demonstrate originality and not be saturated in existing literature
Manuscripts that do not meet these basic requirements may be rejected at this stage without being sent for external review (Desk Reject).

2. Desk Review (TIMER) (1-4 weeks)
Manuscripts that pass the Zero Gate are further evaluated using the TIMER criteria:

Component    Checked Item    Requirement
Technical    Format, file type, font, spacing, margins    Must comply with Author Guidelines
Integrity    Plagiarism check    Similarity index ≤ 25% (excluding references and quotes)
Mandatory    Structural elements    Must include: Research Gap, Ethical Considerations/Reflexivity, Community Context
Evidence    References    ≥80% from accredited journals (Sinta/Scopus), managed with Mendeley/Zotero
Ratio    Proportion of sections    Introduction ≤20%, Method ≤15%, Results & Discussion ≤60%
Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to authors for revision (Major Revision) before being sent to reviewers.

B. Reviewer Assignment
Manuscripts that pass both the Zero Gate and Desk Review (TIMER) stages will be assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area and, where applicable, to the specific community context (coastal, urban, or inland) being studied.

Reviewers are assigned based on:

Expertise and academic background

Relevance to the manuscript's topic

Ability to evaluate the manuscript objectively and fairly

Reviewers are expected to declare any potential conflict of interest. If a reviewer has a conflict of interest with the manuscript, the author, or the research topic, the editorial team may assign the manuscript to another reviewer.

C. Review Process (1-4 weeks)
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback on the following aspects:

No    Criteria    Assessment
1    Originality/Novelty    Does the research offer new insights?
2    Methodology    Is the method appropriate and clearly described?
3    Community Engagement    Does the manuscript demonstrate engagement with the community?
4    Results & Discussion    Are findings discussed in depth and compared with previous studies?
5    Conclusion    Does the conclusion answer the research questions and state implications?
6    References    Are references current and relevant?
Reviewers may provide recommendations to the editor, including whether the manuscript should be:

Accepted

Accepted with minor revisions

Accepted with major revisions

Resubmission required

Rejected

Reviewer comments are used by the editor as an important consideration in making the editorial decision.

D. Review Processing Time
Stage    Duration
Stage 1: Zero Gate + Desk Review (TIMER)    1-4 weeks
Stage 2: Peer Review    1-4 weeks
Stage 3: Revision & Final Decision    2-6 weeks
The review process usually takes approximately two to six weeks in total, depending on the availability and response of the reviewers, the complexity of the manuscript, and the revision process. If a reviewer does not respond within the assigned period, the manuscript may be reassigned to another reviewer.

E. Editorial Decision
Based on the reviewers' reports and recommendations, the editor will make an editorial decision. The decision may be one of the following:

Accepted

Accepted with minor revisions

Accepted with major revisions

Resubmission required

Rejected

Authors will receive notification of the decision, along with comments from the reviewers, through the OJS system or email. The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance and publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

F. Revision Process (Two-Stage)
The journal applies a two-stage revision process:

1. Revision 1 (Pre-Review / Administrative Revisions)
If the manuscript passes the Zero Gate but requires improvements in format, structure, or community context clarification, authors are asked to revise before the manuscript is sent to reviewers.

Time given: 14 days

Authors must provide a response letter addressing each point

2. Revision 2 (Post-Review / Substantive Revisions)
After peer review, authors are asked to revise the manuscript based on reviewers' comments and the editor's instructions.

Time given: 14 days for minor revisions; 21 days for major revisions

Authors must provide a point-by-point response letter to each reviewer comment

The editor may send the revised manuscript back to the reviewers for further evaluation, especially when major revisions are required

G. Final Evaluation Before Publication
Before publication, the editorial team may request final improvements related to:

Language and grammar

Formatting and layout

Figures, tables, and images

References and citations

Metadata and author information

This final evaluation is intended to ensure that the manuscript complies with the journal's publication standards.

H. Confidentiality
All manuscripts submitted to Madinah: Jurnal Studi Islam are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than those involved in the editorial and review process.

I. Commitment to Review Integrity
Madinah: Jurnal Studi Islam is committed to maintaining a fair, objective, confidential, and academically responsible peer-review process. The journal ensures that editorial decisions are based on the academic quality, originality, relevance, and contribution of the manuscript to the field of Islamic studies,  with a particular emphasis on research that engages with Muslim communities (coastal, urban, or inland).