Peer Review Process

ICATT Journal of Islamic Studies, published by the Ikatan Cendekiawan Alumni Timur Tengah, implements a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published manuscripts.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial team to ensure they meet the journal’s focus and scope, formatting requirements, and ethical standards. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without further review.

2. Plagiarism Screening

Each manuscript is checked using plagiarism detection software to ensure originality. Manuscripts with a high similarity index may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. The review process is conducted using a double-blind system, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

  • Originality and contribution to the field
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope
  • Methodological rigor
  • Clarity of analysis and argumentation
  • Quality of references and use of sources

5. Review Outcomes

Based on the reviewers’ reports, the editor will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept without revision
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions required)
  • Reject

6. Revision Process

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts according to reviewers’ comments and submit a revised version along with a response to reviewers. Failure to adequately address the comments may result in rejection.

7. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the editor based on the reviewers’ recommendations and the quality of the revised manuscript.

8. Publication

Accepted manuscripts will undergo copyediting, layout editing, and proofreading before publication. Authors will be notified once their article is scheduled for publication.

9. Review Timeline

The peer review process typically takes 2–6 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the number of revisions required.