BIOEDUSCIENCE operates a rigorous peer-review process. In most cases, this is a single-blind assessment with at least two independent reviewers, followed by a final acceptance/rejection decision by the Editor-in-Chief, or another academic editor approved by the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the academic quality of the publication process, including acceptance decisions, approval of Guest Editors and special issue topics, and new Editorial Board members.

All manuscripts sent for publication in our journals are strictly and thoroughly peer-reviewed by experts (this includes research and review articles, spontaneous submissions, and invited papers). The Managing Editor of the journal will perform an initial check of the manuscript’s suitability upon receipt. The Editorial Office will then organize the peer-review process performed by independent experts and collect at least two review reports per manuscript. We ask our authors for adequate revisions (with the second round of peer-review if necessary) before a final decision is made. The final decision is made by the Editor. Every submitted article will be independently reviewed by two peer reviewers (Double-blind). The decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based upon their reports/recommendations.  After being reviewed, there will be four kinds of editor decisions based on the reviewers’ recommendations:

Accept Submission: The submission will be accepted without revisions.
Revisions Required: The submission will be accepted after minor changes have been made.
Resubmit for Review: The submission needs to be re-worked, but with significant changes, it may be accepted. It will require a second round of review.
Resubmit Elsewhere: Articles cannot be accepted because the substance of the article is incompatible with the field of science.
Decline Submission: The submission will not be published in the journal.
See Comment: see the feedback from the reviewer for the Editor.

Articles may be accepted without revision, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejected. The results of reviewed articles by reviewers will be notified to the author via email. The author is given an opportunity to revise his article based on the reviewers' suggestion (and editor) no later than 10 weeks after the email notification.

Here you may find a sample model of the open peer review process in BIOEDUSCIENCE.


All incoming articles will be checked for authenticity to prevent plagiarism by using Turnitin and/or iThenticate anti-plagiarism software. Please read here for information about Plagiarism.
All articles published in Jurnal Bioeduscince are open access by following the Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY). The Full license can be found here.

Reviewer guidelines

BIOEDUSCIENCE is committed to peer-review integrity and upholding the highest standards of review. Once your paper has been assessed for suitability by the editor, it will then be double-blind peer-reviewed by independent peers within the relevant field. We believe in the integrity of peer review with every journal we publish ascribing to the following statement:

All published research articles in this journal have undergone rigorous peer review, based on initial editor screening, anonymous refereeing by independent expert referees, and consequent revision by article authors when required.

“We are sincerely grateful to reviewers who give their time to peer-review articles submitted to BIOEDUSCIENCE. Rigorous peer-review is the cornerstone of high-quality academic publishing.” 

Benefits of Reviewers

Peer review is an essential part of the publication process, ensuring that BIOEDUSCIENCE maintains high-quality standards for its published papers. Reviewing is often an unseen and unrewarded task. We are striving to recognize the efforts of reviewers.

When reviewing for BIOEDUSCIENCE you will:

  1. Are included in the journal’s annual acknowledgment of reviewers.
  2. Receive a personalized reviewer Certificate and Letter of Assignment (SK).
  3. Can build your profile on Publons and have your reviewing activity automatically added for participating journals. Publons profiles can also be integrated with ORCID iD iconORCID.

Invitation to Review

Manuscripts submitted to BIOEDUSCIENCE are reviewed by at least two experts. Reviewers are asked to evaluate the quality of the manuscript and to provide a recommendation to the external editor on whether a manuscript can be accepted, requires revisions, or should be rejected.

We ask invited reviewers to:

  1. Accept or decline any invitations quickly, based on the manuscript title and abstract.
  2. Request an extension in case more time is required to compose a report.

As part of the assessments, reviewers will be asked:

  1. To rate the originality, significance, quality of the presentation, scientific soundness, interest to the readers, overall merit, and Indonesian language of the manuscript;
  2. To provide an overall recommendation for the publication of the manuscript;
  3. To provide a detailed, constructive review report;

Confidentiality and Anonymity

Reviewers should keep the content of the manuscript, including the abstract, confidential. Reviewers must inform the Editorial if they would like a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf.
BIOEDUSCIENCE operates a double-blind peer review. Reviewers should be careful not to reveal their identity to the authors, either in their comments or in metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format. In all other cases, review reports are considered confidential and will only be disclosed with the explicit permission of the reviewer.

Call For Reviewer

We are happy to welcome experts who are willing to build and advance the journal BIOEDUSCIENCE. We call you to be the Editorial Board or Reviewer here. Your performance will be highly appreciated. You can fill out this form to join us.


Reviewers responsibilities

The reviewer BIOEDUSCIENCE is responsible for both the author and the editor regarding the manuscript. Peer review is the principal mechanism by which the quality of research is judged. Most funding decisions in science and the academic advancement of scientists are based on peer-reviewed publications.

Peer reviewer responsibilities toward the author

  1. Providing written, unbiased feedback on time on the scholarly merits and the scientific value of the work
  2. Comments given by the reviewers should be clear and relevant to the subject, and accurate, which creates interest in the authors.
  3. Personal & Financial conflicts must be avoided.
  4. The review process should be confidentially maintained.

Peer reviewer responsibilities toward the editor

  1. We notify the editor immediately if unable to review on time and provide the names of other potential reviewers if possible.
  2. Following the editor's written instructions on the journal's expectations of the submitted work
  3. Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it, and giving decisions based on rating
  4. Provide an apparent and levelheaded reason for giving decisions based on common ethics
  5. Personal & Financial conflicts should be alerted.
  6. Stave off direct contact with the author without the editor's permission.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: - Reviews and reviewer comments should be held confidentially. manuscripts or copies of the process shouldn't be retained with the reviewers after the procedure is commenced
  2. Constructive Evaluation: - Decisions and judgment should be constructive that provide legible insight to the author without any controversy or inefficiencies with the review process.
  3. Competence: -Reviewer with passable expertise will serve the purpose of completing the review. People lacking adequate expertise should feel responsible and can decline the review.
  4. Impartiality and Integrity: - Reviewer's decision should solely depend on scientific merit, relevance to the subject, and the scope of the BIOEDUSCIENCE instead of on the financial, racial, or ethnic origin of the authors.
  5. Timeliness and Responsiveness: - Reviewer should be responsible for completing the review within the appropriate time and take all necessary steps to fulfill the limitations of the BIOEDUSCIENCE.