Peer Reviewer Process

Psycounia: Indonesian Journal of Psychology and Counseling applies a rigorous and transparent peer review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, relevance, and integrity of every manuscript published in the journal. All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening followed by a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript is first screened by the Editorial Team to assess its compliance with the journal’s aims and scope, author guidelines, manuscript structure, academic quality, originality, and ethical requirements. The manuscript is also subjected to plagiarism/similarity screening.

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic requirements of the journal may be returned to the authors for improvement or rejected before being sent for peer review. Manuscripts that meet the initial requirements proceed to the peer review stage.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is reviewed by two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in psychology, counseling, or related interdisciplinary fields.

Psycounia uses a double-blind review system, meaning that:

The reviewers do not know the identity or affiliation of the authors.
The authors do not know the identity or affiliation of the reviewers.
Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, independently, and confidentially.
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest before accepting a manuscript for review.

The reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on several aspects, including:

Relevance to the aims and scope of the journal;
Originality and contribution to the field;
Clarity of the research problem and objectives;
Adequacy and appropriateness of the theoretical framework;
Appropriateness of the research methodology;
Accuracy and clarity of data presentation and analysis;
Quality and depth of discussion;
Consistency between findings, discussion, and conclusions;
Quality and relevance of references;
Academic writing quality and manuscript organization; and
Compliance with research and publication ethics.

3. Reviewers’ Recommendations

After evaluating the manuscript, each reviewer provides comments and a recommendation to the Editor. The possible recommendations are:

Accept Submission – the manuscript is suitable for publication with no or only minor editorial adjustments.
Minor Revision – the manuscript requires limited revisions before publication.
Major Revision – substantial revisions are required before the manuscript can be considered for publication.
Reject – the manuscript does not meet the academic, methodological, ethical, or scope requirements of the journal.

The final editorial decision is made by the Editor based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the quality of the manuscript, and the journal’s editorial policies. Reviewer recommendations serve as important considerations but do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

4. Revision Process

When revisions are required, authors receive the reviewers’ comments and are expected to revise the manuscript carefully. Authors should address each reviewer comment and make appropriate revisions to the manuscript.

Where necessary, a revised manuscript may be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation. This process may continue until the manuscript meets the journal’s academic and publication standards.

Authors are expected to submit revisions within the timeframe specified by the Editorial Team. Delayed submission of revisions may extend the overall publication process.

5. Review Duration

The peer review and editorial process for each manuscript generally takes approximately 1 week to 1 month, depending on several factors, including:

The availability and responsiveness of the assigned reviewers;
The complexity of the manuscript;
The time required by reviewers to complete their evaluations;
The extent of revisions required;
The responsiveness of authors in addressing reviewer comments; and
The need for additional rounds of review.

Therefore, the stated timeframe is an estimated processing period rather than a guaranteed publication timeframe.

6. Editorial Decision

After the review and revision processes have been completed, the Editor makes the final decision regarding the manuscript. Manuscripts that satisfy the journal’s academic, methodological, ethical, and editorial standards will proceed to the publication stage.

The Editorial Team reserves the right to request additional revisions, seek further expert evaluation, or reject a manuscript when necessary to maintain the quality and integrity of the journal.

7. Confidentiality and Ethical Conduct

All manuscripts submitted to Psycounia: Indonesian Journal of Psychology and Counseling are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information from a manuscript for personal or professional purposes.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, and evidence-based comments and to avoid personal criticism of the authors. Any suspected plagiarism, research misconduct, ethical concerns, or conflicts of interest identified during the review process should be reported to the Editor.

Through this double-blind peer review process involving two reviewers for each manuscript, Psycounia seeks to ensure a fair, objective, consistent, and academically rigorous evaluation of submitted manuscripts while supporting the responsible advancement of knowledge in psychology and counseling.

Psycounia: Indonesian Journal of Psychology and Counseling
Published by CV. Nawasena Cakrawala
Established 17 August 2026