Peer Review Process

Al-Musyiri: Journal of Da'wah Management

All manuscripts submitted to Al-Musyiri: Journal of Da'wah Management undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure academic quality, originality, relevance, and methodological soundness. The journal applies a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or assigned Section Editor conducts a preliminary assessment to evaluate:

The manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s focus and scope
Compliance with author guidelines and formatting standards
Originality and plagiarism screening using similarity detection software
Basic methodological and academic feasibility

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage or returned to the authors for technical revision.

2. Assignment to Reviewers

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers who possess expertise in the relevant field of Da'wah management, Islamic studies, or related disciplines.

Reviewers are selected based on academic competence, research experience, and absence of conflicts of interest.

3. Double-Blind Review

The journal implements a double-blind review process:

Reviewers do not have access to the authors’ identities.
Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

Originality and contribution to the field
Theoretical foundation and conceptual clarity
Research methodology and data analysis
Academic rigor and argument coherence
Relevance to contemporary issues in Da'wah management
Quality of references and citation practices

Reviewers provide constructive feedback and recommend one of the following decisions:

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

4. Revision Stage

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ comments and submit a detailed response explaining how each comment has been addressed.

Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

5. Final Decision

The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewers’ recommendations and the revised manuscript’s quality.

6. Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout editing, proofreading, and final publication. Authors will receive proofs for final approval before publication.

7. Ethical Standards

The peer review process adheres to publication ethics principles, including confidentiality, objectivity, transparency, and avoidance of conflicts of interest. Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts fairly and professionally without discrimination.