How to review
scientific journals
How to review
scientific journals which will be presented here is summarized from explanation of how to organize a journal review. is one of the largest
academic journal publishers. This institution also houses an international
journal indexation service with the most databases.
Some practical
steps related to how to review journals need to be known by students,
lecturers, teachers, practitioners and academics whose work is related to the
production and writing of scientific journals. Journal review is one of the
activities that is quite commonly done, both institutionally, namely as a
member of an institution's peer review or informally, which is as part of the
process of writing journal articles.
This post will
discuss about how to review academic journals by assuming the reader as a
reviewer who is carrying out the task of reviewing journal manuscripts sent by
the journal editor.
In short, the
reader here is positioned as a member of peer review. Before proceeding with
the explanation, some important points need to be considered by the reader when
accepting an invitation to review journal articles from the editor.
how to review
journals First, the reader must ask whether the manuscript requested to be
reviewed corresponds to your area of expertise or expertise? Strive for you
to accept a review assignment if you feel you can produce a quality review.
Second, the
reader must ensure that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the tasks
assigned by the editor. If there is, you must submit your paper it in advance to the
editor who sent the manuscript.
Third, make sure
you have time to do it. Producing quality journal reviews requires a lot of
time. Not all reviewers receive financial compensation for the task.
How to review
journals
Before starting
to review, the reader must treat the manuscript sent by the editor as a
confidential document. This means that the manuscript of the article may not be
shared with others without the approval of the editor or an authorized party.
When you have
received the manuscript, read the article and then take a short break to think,
ponder, and reflect on what you just read. Not all words must be read, but of
course reading the entire script will be very helpful. After reading the
article, look back at what you have read from the scientific perspective or the
expertise you have.
Keep in mind that
the results of your review will help the journal editor to decide whether the
manuscript is suitable for publication or not. Therefore the reviewer must
provide an overall opinion of the text.
Pointing out the
shortcomings of the article script is very necessary and constructive comments
are highly recommended. It should also be noted that personal information about
you, including names, may not be included in order to maintain the objectivity
of the review process.
Next, I will
describe some practical steps on how to review academic journals that can be
taken by reviewers, especially novice reviewers.
Practical steps
for reviewing journals
◊ First,
summarize the text of the article reviewed in brief paragraphs. Two or three
short paragraphs are enough. This step is done to show the editor that the
reviewer has read and understood the contents of the manuscript.
◊ Second, give
your impression of the article, including whether the article is actual, the
issue discussed is interesting, and has an influence on the development of
science in its field.
◊ Third, provide
your comments on whether the article meets national or international journal
standards. Some criteria need to be explained whether it meets or not.
◊ Fourth, provide
comments and suggestions regarding the structure and substance of the article,
including the format and layout, title, abstract, introduction, method,
results, conclusions or discussion, the language used, and references.
◊ Fifth, if there
are indications related to plagiarism, conflicts of interest, and / or issues
of code of ethics, submit it to the editor as part of the review.
Enam Sixth, if
there is an indication of a high level of bias, including the validity and
reliability of research results, reviewers must submit it to the editor because
it will have a negative impact on the quality of the publishing journal.
Ujuh Seventh, as
mentioned earlier, the reviewer must treat the article as a confidential document.
This applies both before, during and after the publication process.
Elapan Eighth,
every comment and suggestion written must be based on scientific reasons rather
than an attempt to "find face" before the editor.
◊ Ninth, when
making recommendations for editors, pay close attention to three important
criteria, namely the manuscript is rejected, accepted without revision, or
accepted with revisions both minor and major. If accepted with a revision,
explain which parts need to be revised by the author.
The nine steps
are a general process that is implemented as part of a way to review academic
journals. The next decision of the fate of the manuscript after being reviewed
is in the hands of the journal editor. Reviewers here are tasked with
"assisting editors" in the manuscript review corridor.
Scientific
Journal: Definition, Process of Publication & Example
Scientific
journals are published as a means or media for the dissemination of research
results in certain disciplines or subdisciplines. Scientific journal publications are generally in the form of articles including research reports,
literature reviews, proposals on untested theories or opinion articles. The
form of the published article depends very much on the policy of the journal
institution itself or the journal publisher.
Articles written
in scientific journals are produced by individuals in the scientific community.
The scientific community can consist of students, teachers, lecturers,
researchers, professors, journalists and so on. Writing the article can be done
individually or collectively. In general we already know that articles written
must be scientific, meaning that they are produced through a research process
that applies scientific methods.
This post will
briefly discuss the understanding of scientific journals, how journals are
published, and what their examples are like. I suggest readers to position this
post as an introduction to what is a journal as we often hear the term in the
academic world. We begin the discussion from the definition.
Definition of
scientific journals
scientific
journals Scientific journals are often called academic journals. In English it
is translated as 'scientific journal' or 'academic journal'. Academic journals
can be described as a collection of scientific articles that are published
regularly in order to disseminate research results. Disseminated research
results often challenge general assumptions that circulate among the public or
challenge (critique) the findings of previous research. Dissemination results
can also display new data in the academic literature.
Academic journals
are always specific, meaning that they are written in the perspective of
certain disciplines or disciplines. In other words, represent specialization in
certain scientific fields. For example, a journal called 'Acta Sociologica', is
an academic journal in the discipline of sociology. To get a clearer picture of
what a scientific journal is, we need to know how the process of publishing an
academic journal.
The process of
publishing scientific journals
We first imagine
that there is a scientific community that forms associations. I will explain
through examples as 'props' only. Suppose there is a scientific association
called Pop Culture Studies. The association agreed to make a scientific journal
that focuses on the phenomenon of pop culture from an anthropological
perspective. The journal was given the name 'Journal'. Pop Studies
culture does not happen to have its own publishing agency, so they publish
their journals in existing publishers. The publisher for example is named
'LIPII'.
Here we see that
Pop Culture Culture wants to publish a journal called 'Journal'
published by LIPII. Then, how is the journal published? The process is actually
similar to other article publications. It's just that the value highlighted is
the scientific value and its contribution to the academic field and / or public
policy.
To publish the Journal' Journal, we (the authors) send manuscripts (manuscript
articles) to the Journal. The writer can be anyone but the editor and
revealer of the Journal. The manuscript, of course, must be related to
the study of pop culture. Once written, the manuscript is received by the
Editor Journal, then collected and sent to reviewers of the Journal journal, which usually consists of experts. Delivery to reviewers
continues with the peer-review process.
What is
peer-reviewed? Peer-review is the process by which two or more experts related
to the topic we write evaluate our manuscript at the request of a journal
editor. Reviewers carefully give judgments based on their expertise. This
assessment will determine whether our manuscript is suitable for publication,
needs revision, or is not suitable for publication.
Often the review
process involves circulating manuscripts between reviewers. It is important to
know that the manuscripts that arrive at the reviewer are usually anonymous.
That is, the name of the author and the author's institution have been
temporarily removed to avoid bias or subjectivity in judgment. Reviewers
themselves are also usually anonymous so that the writer can maintain his
objectivity when accepting the results of the review.
After the
evaluation or review process is complete, the reviewer sends the manuscript
along with the results of his evaluation to the journal editor. The results of
the evaluation generally take the form of comments and criticisms of the
writing, including the strengths and weaknesses substantively and technically.
The editor reads the reviewers' comments to consider whether the manuscript
(article) is worthy of publication, needs to be revised or rejected.
One question that
often arises is about payment. Does the reviewer receive financial compensation
for his services? This depends on the institution of the journal. If the Pop
Studies Cultural Association budgeted a fee for the reviewer, the reviewer
would get paid for his services. Like reviewers, writers too. Some writers get
paid, some don't. In fact there are also writers who must pay when the article
is published.
Another question
that also often arises in the world of journalism is, does the content of
journal articles reflect the position of the editor, journal management
association, and journal publisher? The answer is no. Journal articles reflect
the thoughts of their authors. Quite often journal publications are accompanied
by a disclaimer that journal content does not represent the views of the
journalists' associations and publishers.
Benefits of
scientific journals
Some of the
benefits that can be mentioned here include:
»As a means of
developing knowledge. Scientific journals are the arena of intellectual
discourse through writing. The development of science can be done with research
findings, criticism of research findings, consensus building and new findings.
The process continues. That's how science develops and journals play an
important role as a means.
»As a public
policy database. Public policy requires academic texts as its foundation.
Journals can act as a scientific basis for making public policy. Without
scientific basis, public policy can be said to be made arbitrarily.
Several other
benefits can be mentioned both qualitatively and quantitatively.
Quantitatively, for example the number of scientific journal publications is
usually used as a benchmark for the progress of an institution or institution
such as, a country, a university, a study center, and so forth.