ALAM CIPTA  follows a double-blind peer review process. Peer review is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the dissemination of sound science. Peer reviewers are experts chosen by journal associate editors to provide a written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript, intending to improve the quality of the manuscript for the journal.

Two (2) or three (3) reviewers will independently evaluate the scientific quality of the submitted manuscripts. Authors are encouraged to indicate the names of 2 to 3 potential reviewers. These reviewers are subjected to the editor’s final choice and are not bound by these suggestions. Each manuscript will be assigned to an associate editor who decides to choose the reviewers. The comments from the reviewers will be sent back to the associate editors in a report which will be finally sent to the Editor-in-Chief to accept or reject the manuscript, invite the authors to revise and resubmit the manuscript, or seek additional review reports. If a revision is indicated, the editor provides guidelines to the authors for attending to the reviewers’ suggestions and perhaps additional advice about revising the manuscript.

The authors will then return a revised manuscript version to the Editor-in-Chief. The authors may also submit a rebuttal when the authors disagree with certain comments provided by the reviewers. Finally, the Editor-in-Chief sends the revised manuscript out for re-review. Typically, at least 1 of the original reviewers will be asked to examine the article. When the reviewers have completed their work, the Editor-in-Chief examines their comments and decides whether the manuscript is ready to be published, needs another round of revisions, or should be rejected.