Reviewer Guidelines

As a reviewer for Jufils: Jurnal Filsafat dan Sains, your feedback is essential in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal. Please consider the following guidelines while evaluating submitted manuscripts:

1. Presentation:

  • Assess the overall organization and structure of the manuscript.
  • Ensure that sections are clearly delineated and that the manuscript follows the journal’s formatting requirements.
  • Check for clarity in diagrams, tables, and figures, ensuring they enhance the reader's understanding.

2. Writing:

  • Evaluate the clarity and coherence of the writing. It should be precise, well-articulated, and free of jargon.
  • Look for grammatical correctness and adherence to academic writing standards.
  • Ensure that the writing style is appropriate for the intended audience of the journal.

3. Length:

  • Confirm that the manuscript adheres to the journal’s word count limits for each section.
  • Consider whether the length is appropriate for the content, ensuring that all relevant information is included without unnecessary verbosity.

4. Title:

  • Evaluate whether the title accurately reflects the content and focus of the manuscript.
  • The title should be concise, informative, and engaging to capture the reader's attention.

5. Abstract:

  • Review the abstract for clarity and conciseness. It should summarize the main objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of the study.
  • Ensure that the abstract is self-contained and provides a clear overview of the manuscript.

6. Introduction:

  • Assess the effectiveness of the introduction in presenting the research question and its significance.
  • Evaluate whether the background information is sufficient to contextualize the study within existing literature.
  • Check for clear objectives and hypotheses stated in the introduction.

7. Method:

  • Review the methodology for appropriateness and rigor. It should be clearly described, allowing for replication of the study.
  • Ensure that the methods are suitable for addressing the research questions posed in the introduction.
  • Assess whether ethical considerations have been addressed.

8. Results:

  • Evaluate the presentation of results for clarity and coherence. Data should be presented logically and effectively.
  • Check that tables, figures, and statistics are used appropriately and enhance the understanding of the findings.
  • Ensure that results are presented without interpretation—this should be reserved for the discussion.

9. Discussion:

  • Assess whether the discussion adequately interprets the results in the context of the research question and existing literature.
  • Look for critical analysis of the findings, including limitations and implications for future research.
  • Ensure that the conclusions drawn are supported by the results presented.

10. Conclusion:

  • Evaluate the conclusion for clarity and relevance. It should succinctly summarize the main findings and their significance.
  • Check for recommendations for future research or practical applications of the study’s findings.