Link Reviewer Guideline and CV

Responsibility of Peer Reviewer

Peer reviewers are responsible for critiquing by reading and evaluating manuscripts in their field of expertise and then giving constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers discuss the article's strengths and weaknesses, how to increase the strength and quality of the paper, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript.

Before reviewing, please note the following:

Is the article requested to be reviewed by your expertise?

If you receive a script that covers topics that are not appropriate areas of your expertise, please notify the editor as soon as possible. Please recommend an alternative reviewer.

Can you review this paper?

The review process must be completed within two weeks. If you agree and require a longer period, notify the editor immediately or suggest an alternative reviewer.

Is there any potential conflict of interest?

Meanwhile, conflicts of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer; disclose all conflicts of interest to the editor before reviewing. If you have any questions about potential conflicts of interest, do not hesitate to contact the editorial office.

Review Process

When reviewing the article, please consider the following:

Title: Does it clearly illustrate the article?

Abstract: does it reflect the contents of the article?

Introduction: does it describe the accuracy of matters submitted by the author and clearly state the problem being considered? Typically, the introduction should summarize the context of the relevant research and explain the research findings or other findings, if any, offered for discussion. This research should explain the experiments, hypotheses, and methods.

Content of the Article

In order to determine the originality and suitability for the journal, are there any elements of plagiarism over 20% of this paper's field? A quick literature search can use certain tools, such as Scopus, to see if there are similarities from other parts.

If other authors had previously done the study, is it still eligible for publication?

Is the article fairly new, fairly deep, and interesting to be published?

Does it contribute to knowledge?

Does the article adhere to the journal's standards?

Scope - Is the article in line with the objectives and scope of the journal?

Method:

Comprehensive and perfect:

Does the author accurately describe how the data is collected?

Is the theoretical basis or reference used appropriately for this study?

Is the exposure design suitable for answering the question?

Is there enough information for you to imitate the research?

Does the article identify the following procedures?

Are there any new methods? If there is a new method, does the author explain it in detail?

Is there any appropriate sampling?

Have the tools and materials used been adequately explained? and,

Does the article accurately reveal what data type is recorded when describing the measurement?

Results:

This is where the author must explain the findings of their research. It should be laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider whether the appropriate analysis has been carried out, including the use of statistical tools. If you have better statistical tools to be used in this study, notify it, and the interpretation need not be included in this section.

Discussion and Conclusion:

Are the claims in this section supported by fair results and reasonable?

Does the author compare the research results with those of other previous studies?

Do the results of the research written in the article contradict the previous theories?

Does the conclusion explain how better scientific research is to be followed up on?

Tables and Pictures:

Is it suitable with the referred explanation by showing data that is easy to interpret and understandable for the readers?

 

Writing Styles

Authors must be critical, mostly of the literature systematic review of the issues relevant to the field of study.

Reviews should be focused on a single topic.

All exposure should be in English and written in good and coherent grammar.

Easy to understand

Interesting to read

Things that need to be considered:

Perspective

This is a unique perspective that describes experiences and situations related to issues in islamic marketing, islamic banking, islamic finance, islamic accounting, islamic economics, islamic business, islamic management, islamic entrepreneurship, islamic philanthropy, islamic business ethics, and islamic business innovation and digitalization.

Originality Research

The original data and testing 

It must present data that offers a new approach to improving systems, processes, and the precision of the tools used.

Research policy and observational analysis

It should clarify the research results' feasibility, effectiveness, and implementation. It is not limited to islamic marketing, islamic banking, islamic finance, islamic accounting, islamic economics, islamic business, islamic management, islamic entrepreneurship, islamic philanthropy, islamic business ethics, and islamic business innovation and digitalization.

In Practice (case study), The paper should explain the situation regarding the future challenges in islamic marketing, islamic banking, islamic finance, islamic accounting, islamic economics, islamic business, islamic management, islamic entrepreneurship, islamic philanthropy, islamic business ethics, and islamic business innovation and digitalization.

 Reference

First Person (Interview)

Book Reviews

Insight Technology (Product Review)

Final Review

All results of the review submitted by reviewers are confidential

If you want to discuss the article with a colleague, kindly inform the editor

Do not contact the author directly.

Ethical issues:

Plagiarism: If you suspect the article is mostly plagiarism from other authors, please let the editor know the details

Fraud: It is tough to detect a fraud category, but if you suspect the results in the article are not true, please inform the editor

 Please complete "The Review" by the due date to the editorial office. Your recommendation for the article will be considered when the editor makes a final decision, and your honest feedback is highly appreciated.

When you write a comment, please show the part of the comment that is only intended for the editor and parts that can be returned to the author.

Please do not hesitate to contact the editorial office with any questions or problems.