PEER REVIEW PROCESS

The publication of articles in Dynamics of Rural Society Journal (DRSJ) is entirely dependent on the scientific validity and coherence, as assessed by the editor and/or peer reviewers. These reviewers will also assess the clarity of the writing and determine whether the work makes a significant contribution to its field.

DRSJ maintains a rigorous and professional peer review process. We ensure that every article undergoes a thorough evaluation, where experienced reviewers assess the clarity, novelty, and scientific relevance of the work. Peer reviewers not only critique the technical quality but also provide constructive feedback to help authors improve and refine their manuscripts. We acknowledge and greatly appreciate the efforts and recommendations made by our reviewers, as they play an essential role in maintaining the credibility and integrity of the journal.

Initial evaluation by the editor

Upon submission, the manuscript will undergo an initial editorial evaluation. This process is intended to ensure that the submitted manuscript meets the journal’s basic standards and is aligned with the scope and focus of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal (DRSJ). The editor will carefully assess whether the manuscript follows the prescribed template and complies with the journal’s submission guidelines.

As part of the initial evaluation, the editor will also verify the originality of the manuscript. Submitted manuscripts must be original works that have not been published elsewhere and are not under consideration for publication in other journals. To maintain a high standard of originality, each manuscript will be checked for similarity. The maximum acceptable similarity index is 20%. Manuscripts exceeding this threshold will not be considered for further processing.

The initial editorial evaluation will take no more than two weeks. If the manuscript passes this stage, it will be forwarded to the peer review stage. The editor will assign two to three reviewers with expertise in the relevant field to provide a thorough and objective assessment of the manuscript’s scientific quality, including its novelty, methodology, and contribution to the relevant field of study.

If the manuscript does not meet the required criteria during the initial evaluation, it will be returned to the author with detailed correction notes, suggestions, and feedback for improvement. Authors will be given a maximum of three days to revise the manuscript if the required corrections are minor, or a maximum of seven days if the corrections are substantial.

Through this process, the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal seeks to ensure that only manuscripts meeting the journal’s standards proceed to the next stage, thereby maintaining the integrity and credibility of the journal as a trusted platform for scholarly publication.

Reviewer Evaluation

Manuscripts that pass the initial evaluation will be sent to reviewers for further assessment. Dynamics of Rural Society Journal uses a double-blind review process, meaning both the authors' and reviewers' identities are kept confidential. In this process, authors do not know who is reviewing their manuscript, and reviewers do not know who the authors are.

The review process, conducted by two to three reviewers, will take a maximum of 2-8 weeks. Reviewers will evaluate the manuscript thoroughly, focusing on clarity, originality, methodology, and its contribution to the field of study. They will also provide feedback on how the manuscript can be improved. Based on their assessment, reviewers will recommend one of the following:

1. Accepted Submission: The manuscript has met the journal’s quality and academic standards and is eligible to proceed to the next stage.
2. Minor Revisions: The manuscript can be published after making small adjustments based on the reviewers’ feedback. These revisions may include correcting language, adding minor references, or clarifying certain sections.
3. Major Revisions/Revise and Resubmit: The manuscript can be published, but significant changes are required. These may include:
   • Adding more detailed analysis of field data.
   • Providing additional field data where needed.
   • Rewriting unclear paragraphs or sentences.
   • Clarifying or confirming the main theories used.
   • Addressing other substantial issues to improve the manuscript.
4. Rejected: The manuscript is not suitable for publication due to serious issues with its quality or relevance to the journal's scope.

Once the reviewers provide their recommendations, the editorial board will review their feedback and decide on the manuscript’s status. If the decision is Accepted Submission, the manuscript is accepted for publication without requiring substantial revisions, although minor editorial or formatting adjustments may still be requested. If the decision is Minor Revisions, the manuscript is generally acceptable, but the author must make minor improvements within 1–2 weeks. If the decision is Major Revisions/Revise and Resubmit, the manuscript requires substantial changes, and the author will be given up to 3–6 weeks to complete the revisions. If the decision is Rejected Submission, the manuscript will not proceed to publication because it does not meet the journal’s requirements or standards.

If the reviewers disagree—such as when one recommends Rejecting the manuscript while the other recommends Accepted, Minor Revisions, or Major Revisions—the editor will assign a third reviewer to assess the manuscript. The third reviewer's opinion will help decide the next steps. If the third reviewer also recommends Rejecting, the editor will discuss all three reviews with the Editor in Chief and other editorial board members with expertise in the manuscript’s subject area.

This discussion will lead to a final decision on the manuscript. If the discussion shows that the Reject decision from two reviewers is due to major issues with the manuscript or its quality, the final decision will be to Reject the manuscript. However, if the Reject decision is based on correctable issues, such as concept errors, and the manuscript's quality is considered moderate, the editor may give the author a final chance to make Major Revisions.

If the author does not use this opportunity to make significant improvements, the final decision will be Rejecting the manuscript. The final status of the manuscript will always be based on careful consideration by the editorial board to ensure the manuscript meets the journal’s standards.

Submission Statistics, Acceptance Rate, and Number of Articles Published

Each year, Dynamics of Rural Society Journal receives approximately 20 manuscripts for consideration. Of these, approximately 20% of the authors are from Indonesia, while the remaining 80% are from abroad, including countries such as China, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Netherlands, India, Niger, Indonesia, Hungary, Nigeria, Philippines, Malaysia, and Czechia.

The acceptance rate at DRSJ is highly selective, with only 50% of the submitted manuscripts being accepted for publication. This reflects the journal's commitment to ensuring that only manuscripts meeting high-quality standards and making significant contributions to the advancement of knowledge are selected for publication.

Each year, DRSJ publishes 10 articles that have passed through a rigorous review and revision process. Each issue of the journal will feature 5 articles, with two issues being published annually. This ensures that each article published receives adequate attention from readers and makes a meaningful contribution to the relevant field of study.