Peer Review Policy

The Journal Literasi Pendidikan Fisika (JLPF) is committed to maintaining the quality, integrity, and credibility of scholarly publications through a rigorous, fair, transparent, and independent peer review process. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated according to their relevance to the journal's scope, originality, scientific rigor, methodological appropriateness, clarity of presentation, and contribution to the fields of physics education and physics. JLPF applies a double-blind peer review system to minimize potential bias and ensure that editorial decisions are based on the academic merit of each manuscript.

1. Peer Review Model

JLPF uses a double-blind peer review model in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is evaluated by at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript's subject area.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, subject knowledge, and ability to provide objective and constructive assessments. The editor may seek additional reviews when necessary to support a well-informed editorial decision.

2. Initial Editorial Screening

Every submitted manuscript undergoes an initial assessment by the editor to determine whether it meets the journal's basic requirements before external peer review. The screening considers:

Relevance to the scope of physics education and physics.
Compliance with the journal's author guidelines and manuscript preparation requirements.
Originality and appropriate use of scholarly sources.
Basic academic quality, clarity, and suitability for scholarly publication.
Potential ethical concerns, including plagiarism and redundant publication.

Manuscripts that fall outside the journal's scope, fail to meet essential submission requirements, or present serious concerns regarding originality or publication ethics may be rejected without external review.

3. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

JLPF screens submitted manuscripts using Turnitin or an equivalent similarity-checking tool to identify potential text overlap and support the assessment of originality.

Similarity reports are interpreted by the editor in context. A similarity percentage alone does not establish plagiarism; the nature, source, and appropriateness of the overlapping text are considered. Manuscripts with evidence of plagiarism, inappropriate duplication, or other serious originality concerns may be returned for correction or rejected in accordance with the journal's editorial and publication ethics policies.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are expected to assess manuscripts using relevant academic criteria, including:

Originality and significance of the contribution.
Relevance to the journal's aims and scope.
Clarity of the research problem, objectives, and theoretical foundation.
Appropriateness and rigor of the research design and methods.
Accuracy and adequacy of data analysis and interpretation.
Consistency between the results, discussion, and conclusions.
Quality of writing, organization, references, and presentation.
Compliance with applicable research ethics and publication standards.

5. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers' assessments and the editor's independent evaluation, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

Decision	Description
Accept	The manuscript is accepted for publication, subject to any required editorial or production adjustments.
Minor Revision	The manuscript requires limited revisions that do not substantially affect its central argument or research design.
Major Revision	The manuscript requires substantial revisions and may need further evaluation before a final decision.
Reject	The manuscript does not meet the journal's requirements for publication or has fundamental limitations that cannot be adequately addressed through revision.

Reviewers provide recommendations, while the editor retains responsibility for the final editorial decision. Decisions are communicated to authors through the journal's submission system, together with relevant reviewer comments and revision instructions, as appropriate.

6. Confidentiality and Anonymity

Manuscripts submitted to JLPF and all materials associated with the review process must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share, distribute, reproduce, or use unpublished manuscript content for personal or professional advantage. The identities of authors and reviewers must remain confidential in accordance with the journal's double-blind review policy, except where disclosure is authorized by the journal or required by applicable ethical or legal obligations.

7. Conflicts of Interest and Impartiality

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Reviewers should decline assignments when personal, professional, financial, institutional, or collaborative relationships may compromise their objectivity.

Manuscripts must be evaluated on their scholarly merit without discrimination based on authors' personal characteristics, institutional affiliations, nationality, or other irrelevant considerations.

8. Ethical Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, evidence-based, respectful, and constructive feedback within the requested timeframe. They should identify relevant published work that has not been cited, report concerns about research integrity to the editor, and avoid personal criticism of authors.

Editors are responsible for managing the review process fairly, protecting confidentiality, addressing potential misconduct, and making editorial decisions independently of commercial or personal interests. Authors are responsible for submitting original work, accurately reporting their research, citing sources appropriately, and responding to reviewers' comments in a professional manner.

9. Publication Scheduling

Acceptance of a manuscript does not necessarily guarantee publication in the immediately following issue. Publication scheduling is determined by editorial considerations, including the relevance and timeliness of the research, the date of submission and completion of the editorial process, and the need to maintain an appropriate distribution of topics and contributions. All scheduling decisions remain subject to the journal's publication capacity and editorial standards.