Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Neo Anoa: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and relevance of the published articles.

Initially, each manuscript is evaluated by the editorial team to assess its suitability with the journal’s focus and scope, as well as compliance with the author guidelines. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected without external review.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are then assigned to at least two independent reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. The journal applies a double-blind peer review system, in which both the authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed to maintain objectivity and fairness in the evaluation process.

The reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on several criteria, including originality, methodological rigor, clarity of presentation, relevance to community service practices, and the contribution to knowledge and community empowerment. Reviewers provide recommendations to the editor, which may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.

Based on the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor makes the final decision regarding the manuscript. Authors are required to revise their manuscripts according to the reviewers’ feedback within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

The final decision on manuscript acceptance is made by the Editor-in-Chief. All accepted articles will undergo copyediting, proofreading, and layout editing before publication.

The entire review process is conducted transparently, objectively, and in a timely manner to ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly work.