Reviewer Guidelines

Jurnal TARBAWI applies a double-blind peer-review process. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, confidential, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts.

1. Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents and must not share, discuss, copy, or distribute manuscript content outside the editorial process.

2. Objectivity

Reviews must be based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, relevance, clarity, and contribution to the field. Personal criticism of authors is not acceptable.

3. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline a review assignment if they have any personal, professional, financial, institutional, or academic conflict of interest that may affect their impartiality.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate:

  • relevance to the journal’s aims and scope;

  • originality and scholarly contribution;

  • clarity of research objectives;

  • appropriateness of methodology;

  • quality of analysis and discussion;

  • adequacy and relevance of references;

  • ethical compliance; and

  • overall academic quality.

5. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend:

  • Accept Submission

  • Revisions Required

  • Resubmit for Review

  • Decline Submission

Final publication decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor.

6. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers must inform the editor if they identify suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, citation manipulation, or other publication misconduct.

Reviewers must not use unpublished data, ideas, or information obtained through peer review for personal, academic, or commercial benefit.

7. Use of Generative AI

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, unpublished data, or other confidential editorial materials to publicly accessible Generative AI platforms.

Generative AI must not replace the reviewer’s independent academic judgment.

8. Timeliness

Reviewers should complete the review within the timeframe agreed with the editorial office. If unable to complete the review on time, reviewers should notify the editor as soon as possible.