Peer Review Process

The publication of articles in Journal RISKA (Riset Ekonomi Manajemen dan Akuntansi) is determined solely by the scientific validity, logical coherence, and contribution to the field, as assessed by the editorial team and independent peer reviewers. Reviewers also evaluate the clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal’s scope.

Journal RISKA highly appreciates the valuable time, expertise, and constructive suggestions contributed by its reviewers in maintaining the quality and credibility of published research.

Initial Manuscript Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the editor-in-chief or handling editor within a maximum of 3 weeks. At this stage, manuscripts may be rejected if they are:

Lacking originality or significant contribution to the field
Methodologically flawed or scientifically unsound
Outside the scope and focus of Journal RISKA
Poorly written or not meeting submission guidelines

Manuscripts that meet the basic criteria are forwarded to the peer-review stage.

Type of Peer Review

Journal RISKA uses a double-blind peer review system, where both reviewers and authors remain anonymous throughout the process. Typically, each manuscript is reviewed by two to three independent experts in the relevant field.

Reviewers assess the manuscript’s:

Scientific rigor and coherence
Relevance to the field and novelty of the study
Clarity of writing and structure
Compliance with ethical standards
Contribution to the body of academic literature

Should the initial review process be inconclusive or require clarification, additional rounds of peer review may be conducted.

Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to provide constructive and unbiased feedback, addressing the following key points:

Originality – Are the research objectives and knowledge gaps clearly stated?
Methodological Soundness – Are the methods appropriate, valid, and well explained?
Ethical Considerations – Does the research comply with recognized ethical guidelines?
Results and Conclusions – Are findings clearly presented, and do they logically support the conclusions?
Referencing – Are relevant prior studies appropriately cited and contextualized?

Please note that reviewers are not expected to perform language editing or formatting corrections. Language improvement is the responsibility of the authors and/or the journal’s editorial team post-review.

Journal RISKA upholds a transparent and rigorous peer-review process to ensure academic integrity and the highest quality of published research.