National Journal Accreditation KEMDIKTISAINTEK
| Accreditation Status | ✔ New Re-Accredited |
| Accreditation Coverage | Vol. 4 No. 2 (2025) – Vol. 9 No. 1 (2030) |
| Certificate Status | The accreditation certificate is currently awaiting official issuance. |

JUKTISI applies a structured peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of published scholarly articles.
Jurnal Komputer Teknologi Informasi Sistem Komputer (JUKTISI) uses a structured peer-review process to evaluate manuscripts before publication. The review process is intended to assess the manuscript's scientific quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, clarity, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.
Peer review is conducted independently from the final editorial publication decision. Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts based on reviewer comments before an editorial decision is made.
Manuscripts are evaluated by qualified reviewers who provide independent scholarly assessments. Reviewer identities and confidential review information are handled according to the journal's editorial procedures.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments without personal, commercial, or other conflicts of interest.
The final publication decision is made by the editor based on the review reports, manuscript quality, journal scope, ethical considerations, and the author's response to required revisions.
The author submits the manuscript through the OJS submission system.
The editorial office checks scope, completeness, formatting, originality, and basic ethical requirements.
Appropriate reviewers are selected according to the manuscript's subject area and expertise.
Reviewers evaluate the manuscript and provide comments, recommendations, and revision requirements.
Authors respond to reviewer comments and revise the manuscript where required.
The editor determines whether the manuscript is accepted, returned for further revision, or rejected.
Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, layout, metadata verification, and publication preparation.
The final article is published online in the appropriate journal issue and receives its persistent publication metadata.
Reviewers are encouraged to evaluate manuscripts using relevant academic and methodological criteria, including:
Originality and novelty of the research contribution.
Relevance to the journal's scope and scholarly community.
Appropriateness and rigor of research methods and analysis.
Clarity, validity, and consistency of the research findings.
Adequacy of interpretation and connection with relevant literature.
Quality, relevance, currency, and appropriate use of references.
Clarity, organization, language, tables, figures, and overall presentation.
Compliance with research integrity and publication ethics requirements.
Manuscripts and review materials must be treated as confidential.
Reviews should be objective, constructive, and supported by academic reasoning.
Reviewers should disclose potential conflicts and decline assignments when impartial evaluation cannot be maintained.
Reviewers should complete assignments within the agreed review period or inform the editor when additional time is needed.
The manuscript is accepted for publication subject to completion of the required production process.
The manuscript requires limited revisions before a final decision.
Substantial revisions are required and the manuscript may undergo additional evaluation.
The manuscript is not considered suitable for publication based on the editorial and peer-review evaluation.
Note: The stated periods are target processing times. Actual review and publication timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, revision requirements, author response time, and editorial workload.
JUKTISI expects all participants in the peer-review process to maintain professional standards of confidentiality, fairness, integrity, and respect. Reviewers should not use unpublished manuscript information for personal or professional advantage and should notify the editor of any potential conflict of interest.
The journal may take appropriate editorial action when concerns arise regarding reviewer conduct, conflicts of interest, plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, or other forms of publication misconduct.
Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a substantial factual error, procedural problem, or misunderstanding may contact the editorial office and provide a reasoned explanation for reconsideration.
Appeals should focus on substantive editorial or review issues and should not be used simply to dispute a decision without supporting academic justification. The editor may request additional information or seek further review when appropriate.
Authors and reviewers may contact the editorial office for clarification regarding manuscript evaluation, reviewer assignments, revision procedures, and editorial decisions.
| Accreditation Status | ✔ New Re-Accredited |
| Accreditation Coverage | Vol. 4 No. 2 (2025) – Vol. 9 No. 1 (2030) |
| Certificate Status | The accreditation certificate is currently awaiting official issuance. |





