Reviewer Guidelines

Jurnal Forbis Sains

ISSN 2828-349X
Published by the Faculty of Agriculture, Universitas Muhammadiyah Palu

Introduction

The peer-review process is an essential component of scholarly publishing and plays a vital role in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of scientific publications. Jurnal Forbis Sains applies a rigorous double-blind peer-review system to ensure that all published articles meet high academic and scientific standards.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, ethical, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts. The journal highly appreciates the valuable contribution of reviewers in improving manuscript quality and supporting the advancement of scientific knowledge.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

The review process aims to:

  • Evaluate the originality and scientific contribution of manuscripts
  • Assess the validity and quality of research methods and findings
  • Improve the clarity, accuracy, and academic quality of manuscripts
  • Support editorial decisions regarding publication eligibility
  • Maintain ethical and professional standards in scholarly publishing

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Conduct reviews objectively and professionally
  • Provide constructive comments and recommendations
  • Maintain confidentiality of all manuscript materials
  • Complete reviews within the assigned timeline
  • Notify editors of potential ethical concerns or conflicts of interest

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based solely on academic merit without discrimination related to nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, religion, or political beliefs.

3. Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals
  • Use unpublished data or ideas for personal benefit
  • Discuss manuscript content outside the review process

If reviewers need assistance from colleagues, prior permission from the editor must be obtained.

4. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers should decline the review invitation if they have conflicts of interest related to:

  • Authors or institutions
  • Collaborative relationships
  • Financial or personal interests
  • Competitive or professional relationships

Reviewers must inform the editor immediately if any potential conflict arises during the review process.

5. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts based on the following aspects:

a. Originality and Novelty

  • Does the manuscript present new and significant findings?
  • Does it contribute meaningfully to scientific knowledge?

b. Relevance to Journal Scope

  • Is the topic suitable for Jurnal Forbis Sains?
  • Does the manuscript align with the journal’s focus and scope?

c. Scientific Quality

  • Are the research objectives clear?
  • Is the methodology appropriate and scientifically sound?
  • Are data and analyses valid and reliable?

d. Results and Discussion

  • Are the results presented clearly?
  • Does the discussion adequately interpret findings?
  • Are conclusions supported by the data?

e. Literature and References

  • Are references relevant and up to date?
  • Is the literature review sufficient and appropriate?

f. Language and Presentation

  • Is the manuscript clearly written and well organized?
  • Are tables, figures, and formatting appropriate?

6. Reviewer Recommendations

After evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Accept with major revisions
  • Resubmit for further review
  • Reject

Reviewers should provide clear explanations and constructive suggestions to support their recommendations.

7. Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should report suspected:

  • Plagiarism
  • Duplicate publication
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Ethical violations in research conduct
  • Citation manipulation or unethical practices

Any concerns should be communicated confidentially to the editor.

8. Constructive Feedback

Reviewers are encouraged to:

  • Provide respectful and professional comments
  • Focus on improving manuscript quality
  • Offer specific recommendations and corrections
  • Avoid personal criticism of authors

Constructive peer review contributes positively to academic development and publication quality.

9. Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to complete reviews within the requested timeframe.

If reviewers cannot complete the review on time, they should:

  • Inform the editor promptly
  • Decline the invitation when necessary

Timely reviews help ensure efficient editorial processing and publication schedules.

10. Editorial Communication

Reviewers communicate with the editorial office through the journal’s official review system or designated communication channels.

Editors may request:

  • Additional clarification
  • Re-evaluation of revised manuscripts
  • Further recommendations if necessary

11. Recognition of Reviewer Contribution

The editorial team of Jurnal Forbis Sains highly values the contribution of reviewers in maintaining publication quality and academic integrity.

Reviewer contributions may be acknowledged periodically by the journal while maintaining reviewer confidentiality in accordance with the double-blind review policy.

12. Commitment to Academic Integrity

By participating in the peer-review process, reviewers contribute to the advancement of ethical, transparent, and high-quality scholarly publishing.

Jurnal Forbis Sains is committed to fostering a professional, fair, and constructive peer-review environment that supports scientific excellence and responsible academic communication.