Peer Review Process

Jurnal Online Pertanian Tropik (JOPT) applies a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure scientific quality, originality, impartiality, and academic integrity. All submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial assessment, plagiarism screening, independent peer review, and final editorial evaluation before publication decisions are made. The peer review process consists of the following stages:

1. Editorial Review and Plagiarism Screening

  • Initial Editorial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor evaluates each submitted manuscript based on its relevance to the journal's focus and scope, compliance with author guidelines, originality, scientific contribution, and methodological adequacy.
  • Plagiarism Screening: Manuscripts passing the initial assessment are screened using Turnitin. JOPT applies a maximum similarity index of 25%. Manuscripts exceeding this threshold may be returned for correction or rejected, depending on the nature and extent of the similarities identified. Similarity reports are also evaluated qualitatively to identify potential plagiarism.
  • Editorial Rejection: Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's scientific, ethical, or submission requirements may be rejected before entering the peer review stage.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Anonymity: JOPT employs a double-blind review system in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another throughout the review process. Author names, institutional affiliations, identifying acknowledgments, funding information that reveals author identities, and other identifying details must be removed from manuscripts provided to reviewers.
  • Reviewer Selection: Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the research subject.
  • Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers assess the originality and scientific contribution of the research, methodological rigor, appropriateness of data analysis, validity of findings, quality of discussion, clarity of presentation, and compliance with publication ethics.
  • Reviewer Comments: Reviewers are expected to provide objective, detailed, and constructive feedback. Specific comments and suggested corrections may be included directly in the anonymized manuscript to facilitate scientific revision.
  • Reviewer Recommendations: Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Their recommendations are considered by the editorial team when determining the next stage of manuscript evaluation.

3. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest and Maintaining Editorial Independence

  • Editorial Independence: Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, research quality, ethical compliance, and independent reviewer evaluations.
  • Conflict of Interest Disclosure: Editors and reviewers must disclose any personal, institutional, professional, or financial relationships that could influence their impartiality in evaluating a manuscript.
  • Independent Review: Editors or reviewers with potential conflicts of interest must not participate in the evaluation of the affected manuscript. The manuscript must be assigned to an independent editor or reviewer.
  • Confidentiality: Editors and reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and unpublished research findings throughout the editorial process.

4. Post-Review Process and Editorial Decision

  • Author Revisions: Authors receive anonymized reviewer comments and are expected to revise their manuscripts according to the scientific and technical recommendations provided.
  • Response to Reviewers: Authors should submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a point-by-point response explaining how reviewer comments have been addressed.
  • Re-evaluation: Revised manuscripts are assessed by the handling editor and may be returned to reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.
  • Final Editorial Decision: The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer recommendations, the quality of revisions, scientific merit, and compliance with the journal's editorial standards.
  • Publication Process: Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, and production before publication.

Commitment to Publication Ethics

Jurnal Online Pertanian Tropik (JOPT) is committed to responsible and transparent scholarly publishing in accordance with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME, Version 4, 2022). JOPT promotes publication integrity by preventing:

  • Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: The improper use of others' work or inappropriate reuse of previously published material without proper acknowledgment.
  • Favoritism and editorial bias: Editorial decisions influenced by personal relationships, institutional affiliations, or considerations unrelated to scientific merit.
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest: Failure to disclose personal, professional, institutional, or financial interests that may compromise editorial independence and impartial peer review.

Through a structured, transparent, and impartial peer review process, JOPT is committed to ensuring that every published article, regardless of the authors' institutional affiliations, meets consistent standards of scientific quality, academic integrity, and publication ethics.