Peer Review
Hastagina: Jurnal Kriya dan Industri Kreatif is dedicated to ensuring the quality and integrity of the scholarly content published in the fields of Craft and Creative Industries. All submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous peer-review process based on the Double-Blind Review model.
1. The Double-Blind Review Model
The Double-Blind Review process ensures objectivity and minimizes potential bias during the evaluation of a manuscript. This is achieved by maintaining the anonymity of both the authors and the reviewers throughout the review cycle:
-
Reviewers' Anonymity: Reviewers are unaware of the authors' identity, institution, or background.
-
Authors' Anonymity: Authors are unaware of the reviewers' names or identities.
2. Stages of the Review Process
The peer-review process in Hastagina: Jurnal Kriya dan Industri Kreatif follows these steps:
| Step | Responsible Party | Description |
| I. Initial Screening | Editor-in-Chief / Editorial Team | The manuscript is first assessed for compliance with the journal's scope (Kriya and Creative Industries), adherence to author guidelines, and screened for plagiarism (maximum 20% similarity index). Manuscripts failing this initial screen are immediately desk-rejected. |
| II. Assignment of Reviewers | Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor | The manuscript is stripped of all author and affiliation details. It is then sent to at least two independent expert reviewers who are knowledgeable in the specific field of the submission. |
| III. Peer Review (Double-Blind) | Reviewers | Reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript's originality, methodological soundness (including creative processes), clarity, theoretical contribution, and relevance to the field. Reviewers provide detailed, constructive, and objective feedback to the editor. |
| IV. Editorial Decision | Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor | Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editor’s assessment, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. Possible decisions include: Accept Submission, Minor Revisions, Major Revisions, or Reject Submission. |
| V. Revision and Re-submission | Authors | If revisions are required, authors must address all reviewer comments point-by-point. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the original reviewers for a second round of review to ensure all concerns have been adequately addressed. |
| VI. Final Acceptance | Editor-in-Chief | Once the manuscript meets the high quality and ethical standards of the journal, it is formally accepted for publication and moved to the production and publication stage. |
3. Review Duration
The entire peer-review process typically takes [Specify Duration, e.g., 4 to 8 weeks], depending on the complexity of the manuscript and the promptness of the reviewers. Authors are expected to complete revisions within a specified timeframe to ensure timely publication.
4. Ethical Commitment
All parties (editors, reviewers, and authors), are required to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics as outlined by COPE, respecting the confidentiality and integrity of the review process.
