Peer Review Policy

1. Introduction

INSAN is committed to ensuring the integrity, quality, and relevance of the research published in its proceedings. The peer review process plays a crucial role in maintaining these standards by evaluating the contributions of all submitted manuscripts.

2. Peer Review Process

INSAN implements a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartiality and fairness. At least two independent, qualified reviewers, who are specialists in the relevant field, will examine manuscripts submitted for consideration.

Reviewer Selection and Appointment Criteria:

The conference organizers and Editorial Board are responsible for appointing suitably qualified reviewers. To uphold the academic quality of INSAN, reviewer appointments are guided by the following criteria:

• Expertise and Qualifications: Reviewers should possess advanced academic qualifications (typically a Ph.D. or equivalent) and demonstrate recognized expertise aligning with the manuscript’s specific subject area.
• Publication Record: Appointed reviewers are expected to have a credible track record of publishing in peer-reviewed journals or relevant proceedings.
• Conflict of Interest: To preserve the double-blind standard, reviewers must declare any potential conflict of interest. They will not evaluate manuscripts authored by recent collaborators, advisees, or individuals from their own affiliated institutions.
• Commitment to Quality: Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback within the designated timeframe.

Review Criteria:

Reviewers are required to evaluate each manuscript against the following minimum criteria:

• Contribution to Academic Literature: The manuscript should contribute positively to the literature. Contributions may include new perspectives on familiar topics, comprehensive reviews, or valuable background information.
• Originality and Merit: Manuscripts must be original, previously unpublished, and solely the work of the author(s). The research should demonstrate methodological rigor, accuracy, and correctness.
• Abstract and Title: The abstract should provide a clear and sufficient summary of the goals, methodology, and conclusions. The title must accurately reflect the article’s content.
• Clarity and Conciseness: The manuscript should be logically structured, with ideas that are readable and understandable by the intended readership.
• Language and Presentation: Paper submissions are accepted in both Bahasa Melayu and English. However, for submissions intended to be indexed in Scopus or Web of Science CPCI( Conference Proceedings Citation Index), the manuscript must be written entirely in English. Regardless of the language chosen, manuscripts must use correct grammar and phrasing to sufficiently convey the science and the author’s intent. Poorly written papers may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected prior to the review stage.
• References: Reviewers should consider the appropriateness of references, ensuring that key papers are cited and the citations reflect current and significant research in the field.

3. Review Outcome

The reviewers’ recommendations will be categorized as follows:

• Accept without modifications.
• Accept with minor revisions.
• Accept with major revisions.
• Reject.

Authors will be informed of the decision along with the reviewers’ comments. Manuscripts requiring revisions must be resubmitted within the specified timeframe.

4. Ethical Standards

INSAN upholds the highest ethical standards in the peer review process. Reviewers must adhere to confidentiality, proactively declare any conflicts of interest, and provide objective feedback.

5. Editor’s Role

The conference editors oversee the peer review process, ensuring that all manuscripts undergo a rigorous evaluation according to the guidelines. The editors retain the final decision on manuscript acceptance, considering the reviewers’ recommendations and the quality of the revisions submitted by the authors.

6. Final Consideration

The quality of the published proceedings reflects the peer review process and the work of the editors. INSAN is dedicated to providing a platform for high-quality, citable research that contributes significantly to academic fields.

This peer review policy ensures that the INSAN proceedings maintain a high standard of scholarly communication, aligned with the best practices of ethical and rigorous peer review.