Reviewer Guidelines

TIK ILMEU – Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi expects reviewers to provide objective, constructive, and confidential assessments that help maintain the quality of published articles.

  1. Before accepting a review: Reviewers should only accept a manuscript when it is within their area of expertise and they can complete the review within the required time. Reviewers must decline the assignment if they have a conflict of interest with the authors, institution, research, or funding involved.
  2. During the Review: Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript objectively and focus on its academic content. Comments should be clear, respectful, and supported by appropriate reasoning or evidence. The review should consider, where relevant:
    • originality and relevance of the manuscript;
    • clarity of the research problem and objectives;
    • appropriateness of the methodology;
    • accuracy and consistency of the analysis and results;
    • quality of the discussion and conclusions; and
    • relevance and adequacy of the references.
  1. Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, copy, discuss, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for their own research or other purposes. Reviewers should not contact the authors directly about the manuscript.
  2. Research and Publication Ethics: Reviewers should inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or manipulated data, serious methodological problems, or other ethical concerns. Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed immediately.
  3. Use of Artifiall Intelligence on reviewing: Reviewers must not upload, paste, or otherwise submit the manuscript, reviewer comments, unpublished data, or other confidential material to public or third-party generative AI tools. AI tools may be used only for limited assistance, such as improving the reviewer's own wording, provided that no confidential manuscript content is disclosed. AI must not replace the reviewer's independent academic judgment or determine the editorial recommendation. The reviewer remains fully responsible for the accuracy, confidentiality, and content of the submitted review.
  4. Giving rekomendation: Reviewers should provide a clear recommendation based on their assessment. Possible recommendations may include Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject. The final editorial decision remains with the journal. Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluation within the agreed timeframe or inform the editorial team promptly when an extension is needed.