Memahami Maunya Editor Jurnal & Proses Submit-Review-Terbit Artikel

Overview

The speaker shares practical lessons from personal experience publishing research articles, with particular emphasis on what journal editors look for and how to choose an appropriate journal. The talk focuses less on writing individual article sections and more on navigating submission, review, and publication.

Why Publication Matters—and What “Impact” Means

Research is not considered complete if its findings are never communicated through publication. However, a high publication count does not necessarily mean greater impact. Publications should appear in venues recognized in the relevant field, and the work should matter to that field.

Citation counts are only one measure of impact. Citations can increase without creating meaningful influence, so they should not be treated as a complete measure of research value.

How a Journal Submission Typically Proceeds

Manuscripts usually pass through an editor before reaching reviewers.

1. Initial editorial screening

   • The editor or an associate editor checks whether the title, abstract, and research model fit the journal’s scope.
   • They also check the manuscript’s formatting and for plagiarism.
   • A paper may be rejected without external review if it fails important initial criteria.

2. Peer review

   • If the editor considers the paper suitable, it is sent to reviewers.
   • Review can take several months—often around three to five months, and sometimes eight months to a year at top-tier journals.
   • Reviewers may request revisions or identify problems with the research.

3. Editorial assessment of the reviews

   • The editor considers the reviewers’ recommendations and whether the requested changes are feasible.
   • The editor may reject the manuscript if the concerns are too serious or cannot reasonably be addressed.

4. Revision and resubmission

   • Authors submit a revised manuscript and responses to reviewer comments.
   • The editor checks whether the requested changes have been made and may send the paper back to the original reviewers.
   • A different reviewer may sometimes be assigned, potentially leading to another round of feedback.

5. Further revisions and final decision

   • Later rounds may involve minor revisions, such as formatting or English-language editing.
   • A short revision deadline can suggest that the paper is close to acceptance, but it is not formally accepted until the editor makes that decision.
   • The editor-in-chief makes the final decision.

6. Production and publication

   • After acceptance, the production team formats and prepares the article.
   • Authors are asked to check final details, such as names, affiliations, and other factual information, usually within a specified period. The speaker mentions two weeks.
   • The article may appear online as early access before being assigned to a volume or issue.

Choosing an Appropriate Journal

The speaker cautions against sending a paper to a journal simply because it is prestigious. A journal must be a good match for the paper’s field, topic, quality, and format.

When evaluating a journal, consider:

• Scope and topic fit: Does the journal publish work in the paper’s field, and does its focus match the topic?
• Peer-review practices: Look for evidence of a genuine review process. The speaker distinguishes single-blind review from double-blind review, in which neither the author nor the reviewer knows the other’s identity.
• Reputation and reliability: Check the journal’s history, publisher, indexing, and standing in the field. The speaker names resources such as Web of Science/Clarivate and the ABDC Journal Quality List.
• Publication quality: Repeated typos, unclear tables, or poorly prepared articles may indicate weak editorial quality.
• Timelines and acceptance information: Check whether the journal provides information about review and publication times, as well as acceptance rates.
• Instructions for authors: Follow the journal’s requirements for reference style, formatting, word count, and page limits. Failure to follow guidelines can lead to rejection.
• Special issues and calls for papers: A relevant special issue may make a journal particularly suitable for a paper.
• Editorial-board fit: Consider whether the editors and journal community are credible and knowledgeable in the relevant area.

The speaker advises first-time authors to be cautious about immediately targeting the most prestigious journals. Those aiming high may benefit from collaborating with an experienced researcher who has published in that journal or at a similar level.

Journals and Venues to Approach Cautiously

The speaker recommends checking carefully whether a journal genuinely reviews submitted work. Very rapid acceptance—such as within a week or two—may indicate that review is limited or absent.

The speaker also cautions against submitting major research papers to outlets that are not appropriate scholarly journals. Magazines, online news outlets, and some conference proceedings are characterized as less suitable for reporting completed, extensive research, though they may still be useful for exploring ideas.

Common Reasons a Manuscript Is Rejected

Rejection does not always mean the research is poor. Possible reasons include:

• The manuscript is outside the journal’s scope.
• The journal has already published many papers on similar topics and sees insufficient distinction in the submission.
• The research design or analysis is inadequate.
• The paper’s originality or contribution is unclear.
• The references are not at an appropriate level for the target journal. For a highly ranked journal, the speaker advises drawing mainly on high-quality sources in that area.
• The manuscript contains plagiarism or is missing important materials, such as tables, figures, attachments, or supporting data.
• The writing is difficult to read or does not follow the journal’s formatting instructions.
• The paper does not meet the journal’s quality requirements—or, occasionally, the authors have simply been unlucky.

Ways to Identify Potential Journals

The speaker suggests:

• Asking researchers with a strong and consistent publication record in the relevant field.
• Seeking recommendations through professional associations.
• Searching journal databases and lists, including Clarivate/Web of Science and the ABDC Journal Quality List.
• Using journal-finder tools that accept a paper’s title, abstract, and keywords.
• Checking a journal’s coverage or indexing status rather than relying only on its name or apparent prestige.

The presentation also announces that it will discuss responding to reviewer revisions and finding research ideas, but the provided subtitles mainly cover editorial screening, journal selection, and the submission-to-publication process.

Speakers and Sources Featured

• Speaker: One presenter sharing personal experience in information systems, knowledge management, digital knowledge management, and IT/IS–business alignment.
• Quoted sources: Two professors in the publication field, quoted for the idea that research is unfinished if it is not published.
• Other sources and resources mentioned: A 2015 Springer-related presentation; the book Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks; Sinta; Clarivate/Web of Science; the ABDC Journal Quality List; Scimago; Scopus; and publishers or platforms including Emerald, IEEE, Springer, and ScienceDirect.