All manuscripts submitted to The Sociology of Islam (JSI) undergo a rigorous, transparent, and objective peer review process to ensure academic quality, originality, relevance, and compliance with the journal’s focus and scope. The journal implements a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process.

1. Initial Submission and Desk Review

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Board through a desk review process. At this stage, the manuscript is assessed based on:

• Compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and formatting requirements.
• Relevance to the aims, focus, and scope of The Sociology of Islam (JSI).
• Originality and potential scholarly contribution.
• Minimum standards of academic quality and publication ethics.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be:

• Returned to the author for preliminary revision, or
• Rejected without proceeding to external peer review.

Only manuscripts that successfully pass the desk review stage will continue to the peer review process.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the desk review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript topic. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research background, publication record, and subject relevance.

The review process is conducted using a double-blind system, ensuring that:

• Reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s).
• Author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewers.

The peer review process generally takes approximately three weeks, depending on reviewer availability and responsiveness.

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several academic criteria, including but not limited to:

• Originality and contribution to sociological and Islamic studies.
• Clarity and relevance of the research objectives.
• Adequacy of the theoretical framework and literature review.
• Methodological rigor and appropriateness of data analysis.
• Coherence of arguments and conclusions.
• Quality of academic writing and presentation.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments and recommendations to improve the quality of the manuscript.

4. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations, the Editorial Board will determine one of the following decisions:

Accepted

The manuscript is accepted for publication without revision.

Accepted with Minor Revisions

The manuscript requires minor revisions, such as improvements in clarity, structure, language, or minor methodological adjustments, before final acceptance.

Accepted with Major Revisions

The manuscript requires substantial revisions, such as revisions to the theoretical framework, methodology, data analysis, or overall organization. The revised manuscript must be resubmitted for further evaluation.

Rejected

The manuscript is considered unsuitable for publication due to significant academic, conceptual, or methodological concerns.

The final publication decision remains under the authority of the Editorial Board while considering reviewers’ recommendations.

5. Revision Stage

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the comments and suggestions provided by reviewers and editors.

• For minor revisions, authors are given one (1) week to revise and resubmit the manuscript.
• For major revisions, authors are given three (3) weeks to revise and resubmit the manuscript.

Authors must submit:

• The revised manuscript, and
• A response-to-reviewers document explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed.

Failure to resubmit the revised manuscript within the specified timeframe may result in rejection.

6. Final Evaluation and Decision

Revised manuscripts are re-evaluated by the Editorial Board and, when necessary, by the original reviewers. If the revisions are considered satisfactory, the manuscript will be accepted for publication. However, if the revisions fail to address the reviewers’ concerns adequately, the manuscript may still be rejected at this stage.

7. Proofreading and Copyediting

Accepted manuscripts proceed to the proofreading and copyediting stage to ensure:

• Linguistic accuracy,
• Clarity and consistency of academic writing,
• Compliance with the journal’s formatting and style guidelines.

Authors may be contacted during this stage for clarification or confirmation if necessary.

8. Publication Confirmation

The final layout version (galley proof) of the manuscript will be sent to the author(s) for approval before publication. At this stage, authors are only permitted to correct typographical or minor formatting errors. Substantive revisions or major content changes are not allowed.

After final approval, the manuscript will be scheduled for online publication and, if applicable, print publication by the Editorial Office of The Sociology of Islam (JSI).