Common: Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi implements a rigorous and transparent peer-review system to ensure the academic quality, originality, and scholarly contribution of every manuscript submitted to the journal. All submissions are evaluated through a double-blind peer review mechanism in which neither the authors nor the reviewers are aware of each other’s identities throughout the review process.

Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the editorial team conducts a preliminary assessment to examine the manuscript’s conformity with the journal’s focus and scope, writing guidelines, academic standards, and ethical requirements. At this stage, the manuscript is also screened using plagiarism-detection software to ensure originality. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be rejected without external review.

Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the specific field of communication studies addressed by the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on their academic competence, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest.

Double-Blind Review Evaluation

During the review stage, reviewers critically evaluate the manuscript based on several scholarly criteria, including:

• Relevance to communication science and the journal’s scope

• Originality and novelty of the research contribution

• Theoretical framework and literature engagement

• Methodological rigor and data validity

• Depth of analysis and clarity of argumentation

• Quality of writing and academic presentation

• Significance of findings for theory, practice, or policy

Reviewers provide detailed comments and recommendations categorized as:

1. Accept without revision

2. Minor revision

3. Major revision

4. Reject

Revision and Resubmission

Authors receiving revision decisions are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewer and editor comments within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation, particularly in cases of major revision.

Final Decision

The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewer recommendations, editorial judgment, and the manuscript’s overall scholarly merit. Possible final decisions include acceptance, request for further revision, or rejection.

Ethical Standards and Confidentiality

All reviewers and editors are required to uphold strict confidentiality, objectivity, and academic integrity throughout the review process. Any potential conflicts of interest must be declared. The journal adheres to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics to ensure fairness, transparency, and credibility in scholarly publishing.