These Review Guidelines are established to support reviewers in providing objective, thorough, and ethical assessments of manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Pengabdian Akuntansi untuk Masyarakat, Organisasi, dan Rakyat (PAMOR). The journal follows recognized international publishing standards and aligns with the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Reviewers are expected to uphold the following principles and responsibilities when evaluating manuscripts.
All manuscripts assigned for review are to be handled as confidential materials. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or discuss the content with any third party without explicit authorization from the Editor. Information obtained during the review process must not be used for personal research, professional advancement, or any form of personal benefit.
Reviews must be conducted fairly and objectively. Assessments should focus on the academic quality of the manuscript and not the identity or background of the author(s). Feedback must be expressed in a constructive, respectful, and evidence-based manner, avoiding personal, emotional, or derogatory remarks.
Reviewers are expected to evaluate the manuscript with attention to the following aspects:
Reviewers should provide specific, clear, and actionable feedback aimed at supporting authors in improving their work. Comments should highlight both strengths and areas that require refinement, maintaining a tone of scholarly respect throughout.
Any personal, financial, academic, or professional conflicts of interest that may affect the reviewer’s judgment must be disclosed. Reviewers should decline the assignment if their impartiality could be compromised. Conflicts may include prior collaborations, institutional affiliations, competitive research areas, or close relationships with the authors.
Reviews should be completed within the timeframe specified by the editorial office (usually 2–4 weeks). If additional time is required, reviewers must notify the editor promptly. Reviewers who are unable to complete the review should inform the journal as early as possible, allowing reassignment to another reviewer.
Reviewers must observe ethical standards throughout the review process. Any suspected academic misconduct, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate submission, or unethical research practices, should be reported directly to the editor. Reviewers must not attempt to identify or contact authors, preserving the integrity of the double-blind review system.
All communication regarding the review must occur through the journal’s OJS platform. Reviewers must not contact the authors directly. Any uncertainties, comments, or concerns should be directed to the editorial office for clarification.
