All manuscripts submitted to the Mutawatir: Jurnal Keilmuan Tafsir Hadith undergo a rigorous selection and evaluation process to ensure adherence to the journal’s guidelines, academic focus, and disciplinary scope. Submissions must demonstrate scholarly excellence to proceed through the peer review process.

The journal employs a double-blind peer-review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process, ensuring objectivity and integrity.

1. Desk Review

At the initial stage, each submission is subject to a preliminary evaluation by the Editorial Board to determine its conformity with the journal’s formatting requirements, scope, and standards of academic quality. If the manuscript fails to meet these criteria, the author may be invited to revise and resubmit the work. In some cases, manuscripts may be declined outright at this stage.

2. Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the desk review are forwarded to two independent reviewers who are recognized experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are given three weeks to complete their evaluations. Manuscripts that do not pass the desk review will not proceed to this stage.

3. Reviewer Recommendations

Based on their assessments, reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

• Accepted: The manuscript is approved for publication without revisions.

• Accepted with Minor Revisions: The manuscript requires slight modifications to meet publication standards.

• Accepted with Major Revisions: Substantial improvements are necessary, including in areas such as theoretical framing, data analysis, or organization.

• Rejected: The manuscript does not meet the scholarly standards required for publication, often due to foundational concerns in content or methodology.

These recommendations are then reviewed by the Editorial Board to determine the manuscript’s subsequent path in the editorial process.

4. Revision Stage

If revisions are requested, the manuscript is returned to the author along with a Review Summary Form. Authors are expected to address all reviewer comments thoroughly and return the revised manuscript within the specified time frame:

• Three weeks for major revisions

• One week for minor revisions

Authors must submit the completed Review Summary Form alongside the revised manuscript, detailing how each point raised by reviewers has been addressed.

5. Final Editorial Decision

Upon receipt of the revised manuscript, the Editorial Board re-evaluates the submission to ensure that all feedback has been adequately incorporated. A manuscript may still be declined at this stage if the revisions are deemed insufficient or superficial.

6. Proofreading

Once a manuscript is formally accepted, it undergoes a professional proofreading process to ensure grammatical precision and clarity of expression. This stage helps uphold the journal’s standards of linguistic quality.

7. Publication Confirmation

The finalized layout of the manuscript is then sent to the author for a final review. Authors are given the opportunity to identify and correct any typographical or formatting errors. Following author confirmation, the Editorial Office proceeds with publication, both in print and online.