Peer Review Process

AKUBIS: Jurnal Akuntansi Bisnis Pelita Bangsa is committed to maintaining academic quality, transparency, objectivity, and integrity in scholarly publishing. All manuscripts submitted to AKUBIS undergo an editorial screening and peer review process before a final publication decision is made.

The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the review process.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts electronically through the journal's Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform. All submitted manuscripts must comply with the journal's focus and scope, author guidelines, formatting requirements, and publication ethics.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor conducts an initial assessment to evaluate:

Relevance to the journal's focus and scope.
Originality and scientific contribution.
Completeness of manuscript components.
Appropriateness of research methodology.
Compliance with publication ethics.
Compliance with manuscript preparation guidelines.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's requirements may be rejected without external peer review (desk rejection).

3. Assignment of Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, independence, and absence of conflicts of interest.

4. Double-Blind Peer Review

AKUBIS applies a double-blind peer review procedure to maintain impartiality and minimize potential bias.

Authors' names and institutional affiliations are removed from manuscripts sent to reviewers.
Reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors.
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and review materials.
Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting assignments.

The standard review period is approximately 3–4 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

5. Manuscript Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess manuscripts according to the following criteria:

Originality and novelty of the research.
Relevance and significance of the study.
Clarity of research objectives and questions.
Appropriateness and rigor of the methodology.
Validity and interpretation of research findings.
Depth and relevance of the discussion.
Contribution to accounting, finance, auditing, taxation, or business studies.
Quality and relevance of references.
Clarity, organization, and academic writing quality.
Compliance with ethical research standards.

6. Reviewer Recommendations

Following the evaluation, reviewers submit their assessment reports and may recommend one of the following outcomes:

Accept: The manuscript meets the publication requirements.
Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited improvements.
Major Revision: The manuscript requires substantial revision before further consideration.
Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's publication standards.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision rests with the responsible editor.

7. Editorial Decision

The editor evaluates the reviewers' reports, the manuscript's scientific merit, and compliance with journal policies before determining the appropriate editorial decision.

When reviewer recommendations differ, the editor may seek additional clarification or appoint another independent reviewer before reaching a decision.

8. Revision Process

Authors receiving a revision decision are expected to address reviewer and editor comments carefully and submit:

A revised version of the manuscript.
A point-by-point response to reviewer comments.
A clear explanation of any recommendations that have not been incorporated.

The usual revision period is approximately 4–6 weeks, subject to the deadline specified by the editor.

Revised manuscripts may undergo further evaluation by the editor or the original reviewers when necessary.

9. Final Acceptance and Publication

The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is made by the responsible editor based on the manuscript's quality, reviewer feedback, and compliance with publication requirements.

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout editing, proofreading, and publication. Authors may be requested to review the final proof before publication.

10. Confidentiality and Research Integrity

Editors and reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and review reports as confidential. Unpublished materials must not be disclosed or used for personal advantage.

All individuals involved in the editorial process must disclose potential conflicts of interest and adhere to ethical standards.

AKUBIS follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in addressing concerns related to research integrity, reviewer conduct, confidentiality, and editorial decision-making.

11. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal against an editorial decision through the journal's official contact channel.

Appeals must provide a clear explanation and relevant supporting information. The editorial team will evaluate appeals objectively, taking into account the journal's publication policies.

An appeal does not automatically result in reconsideration or acceptance of the manuscript.

12. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based solely on academic merit, originality, research quality, and ethical compliance.

Decisions must remain independent of financial, institutional, personal, or other inappropriate influences.

Related Policies

Ethical Reference: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) .