Peer Review Process

EDITORIAL POLICY

Peer Review Process

Transparent, Independent, and Constructive Scholarly Evaluation at INTENSI: Intensi Journal Psychology

INTENSI: Intensi Journal Psychology applies a rigorous peer-review process to maintain the scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, ethical integrity, and relevance of manuscripts published in the journal.

All manuscripts considered suitable after the initial editorial screening are evaluated through a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.

REVIEW MODEL
Double-Blind
REVIEW BASIS
Scientific Merit
CONFIDENTIALITY
Strictly Protected
FINAL DECISION
Editorial Authority

Peer Review Workflow

 

Each manuscript follows the editorial and peer-review stages described below.

01

Manuscript Submission

Authors submit manuscripts through the Intensi: Journal Psychology online submission system. Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript complies with the journal's Author Guidelines, focus and scope, publication ethics requirements, and manuscript preparation standards.

↓
02

Initial Editorial Screening

Before a manuscript is sent for external peer review, the Editor or Editorial Team conducts an initial assessment to determine its suitability for the journal.

The initial screening considers:

  • relevance to the journal's focus and scope;
  • completeness of the manuscript;
  • compliance with the Author Guidelines and journal style;
  • clarity and academic quality of language;
  • scientific relevance and originality;
  • appropriateness of the research method;
  • quality and relevance of references; and
  • potential research or publication ethics concerns.
Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's minimum editorial or scientific requirements may be declined at this stage without external peer review.
↓
03

Assignment to a Handling Editor

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are handled by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned to a qualified Handling Editor / Section Editor according to subject expertise and the topic of the manuscript.

↓
04

Reviewer Selection

The Handling Editor selects qualified peer reviewers whose expertise is relevant to the subject, methodology, and scientific content of the manuscript.

Reviewer selection considers scholarly expertise, publication record, relevance to the manuscript topic, independence, institutional diversity, and the absence of conflicts of interest.

↓
05

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts are reviewed using a double-blind peer-review model. Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, and reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.

Reviewers are expected to provide an independent, objective, fair, constructive, and substantive evaluation intended to improve the scientific quality of the manuscript.

↓
06

Reviewer Evaluation

Reviewers may evaluate, among other aspects:

  • relevance to the focus and scope of the journal;
  • originality and scientific contribution;
  • clarity of the research problem and objectives;
  • appropriateness and rigor of the methodology;
  • quality and adequacy of data analysis;
  • interpretation and discussion of findings;
  • relationship between findings and previous literature;
  • accuracy and relevance of conclusions;
  • ethical considerations in psychological research; and
  • quality, relevance, and currency of references.
↓
07

Editorial Decision

After considering the reviewers' reports, the Editor evaluates the manuscript and determines an appropriate editorial decision.

Accept
The manuscript is considered suitable for publication.
Minor Revision / Revision Required
The manuscript requires limited revision. The revised manuscript may be evaluated by the Handling Editor without being returned to the original reviewer, unless further expert assessment is considered necessary.
Major Revision / Resubmit for Review
Substantial revision is required. The revised manuscript is normally returned for another round of peer review.
Decline / Reject
The manuscript is considered unsuitable for publication based on scientific, methodological, ethical, or editorial considerations.
↓
08

Author Revision

When revision is requested, authors are expected to respond carefully to the reviewers' and editor's comments and submit a revised manuscript together with an appropriate response explaining how each comment has been addressed.

↓
09

Further Review and Editorial Assessment

Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review rounds when necessary. Major revisions may be returned to the previous reviewer or another qualified reviewer. The Editor may request further revisions when the manuscript has not adequately addressed substantive concerns.

↓
10

Final Decision and Production

The final decision to accept or reject a manuscript is made by the Editor-in-Chief and/or authorized Handling Editor based on the manuscript's scientific quality, reviewers' reports, authors' revisions, ethical compliance, and journal standards.

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the production stage, which may include copyediting, layout, author proofreading, metadata preparation, and publication.

Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

 

Peer reviewers play an essential role in safeguarding the scientific quality and integrity of Intensi Journal Psychology. Before accepting a review assignment, reviewers should ensure that they possess appropriate expertise and can conduct the review independently and impartially.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • provide objective, fair, respectful, and constructive comments;
  • evaluate manuscripts according to scientific merit;
  • maintain strict confidentiality;
  • not use unpublished information for personal advantage;
  • declare any actual or potential conflict of interest;
  • decline the assignment when the manuscript falls outside their expertise;
  • avoid personal, institutional, ideological, or other inappropriate bias;
  • not require unnecessary citations to their own work; and
  • inform the editor of suspected plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns.

Confidentiality of the Review Process

 

Submitted manuscripts and all related review materials are treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, reproduce, discuss, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal or professional purposes. Confidentiality must be maintained throughout and after the peer-review process.

Conflict of Interest

 

Reviewers must disclose any personal, professional, financial, institutional, collaborative, competitive, or other relationship that may affect—or reasonably appear to affect—their ability to provide an impartial review. Where a significant conflict exists, the reviewer should decline the assignment.

Editorial Assessment After Peer Review

 

Reviewer recommendations provide essential scholarly advice but do not independently determine publication. The Editor critically evaluates the quality and substance of the review reports before making an editorial decision.

Where reviewer recommendations differ substantially or further expertise is required, the Editor may conduct an additional assessment or invite another qualified reviewer before reaching a final decision.

Special Issues and Invited Manuscripts

 

Manuscripts submitted to special or thematic issues, including invited manuscripts, remain subject to the journal's editorial standards, publication ethics requirements, and peer-review procedures. Inclusion in a special issue does not guarantee acceptance.

Review Documentation

The editorial and peer-review process is managed and documented through the journal's online editorial system. Review assignments, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, revisions, and editorial decisions are retained as part of the journal's editorial record.

 

Commitment to Rigorous and Fair Peer Review

Intensi Journal Psychology is committed to an independent, confidential, transparent, constructive, and academically rigorous peer-review process that protects the integrity and quality of published psychological research.