Peer Review Process

For checking Plagiarism, MAP Observer Editor will screen plagiarism manually (offline and online database) on the Title, Abstract, and Body Text of the manuscript, and by using plagiarism detection software (Unplag and Crosscheck). If it is found a plagiarism indication, the editorial board will reject the manuscript immediately.

Peer Review Process
Manuscripts submitted to MAP Observer will go through a selection and assessment process by the Editorial Board to ensure they are in accordance with the writing guidelines, focus, and scope, and have excellent academic quality. Manuscripts will be reviewed using the double-blind peer review method where neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other's identity.

Desk Review. At the desk review stage, the manuscript will be checked to ensure it meets the writing guidelines, focus, and scope with excellent academic quality. If it does not meet the requirements, the author will be given the opportunity to revise the manuscript according to the criteria given. However, there is also the possibility that the manuscript will be rejected outright.

Peer review. When the manuscript has passed the desk review stage, it will then be submitted to two reviewers who are experts in the field of the submitted manuscript. The review process will be carried out within 6 weeks. Manuscripts that do not make it through the desk review process will not proceed to this stage.

Reviewer's decision. Reviewers will provide the following recommendations:

Accepted; means that the manuscript can be accepted for publication
Received with minor revisions; means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication after revision in response to the concerns of reviewers
Received with major revisions; This means that substantive deficiencies in the manuscript, such as data analysis, the main theory used, and paragraph rewriting, need to be revised.
Rejected; means that the manuscript cannot be accepted for publication or the review given is related to a very basic problem
The reviewer's decision will be considered by the Editorial Board to determine the next manuscript process.

Revision Stage. Once a manuscript is received with a minor or major revision notation, the manuscript will be returned to the author with a review summary form. For manuscripts received with major revisions, authors are given 2 weeks to revise. As for manuscripts received with minor revisions, one week is given for revision. When returning a revised manuscript, the author is required to fill out and attach a review summary form.

Final decision. At this stage, the manuscript will be re-evaluated by the MAP Observer Editorial Board to ensure that the authors have revised it in response to reviewers' concerns. In this final decision, the manuscript can still be rejected if the author does not seriously make the necessary revisions.

Correcting. After the manuscript is deemed acceptable by the MAP Observer Editorial Board, the manuscript will undergo a proofreading process to maintain linguistic quality.

Confirm publication. At this stage, the final layout of the manuscript will be sent back to the author to ensure that the contents match the author's writing. At this stage, the author can revise the typos found in the final manuscript. After confirmation from the author is given, the Editorial Secretary of MAP Observer will process the manuscript for online publication on the website or print publication.