PT Altianka Literasi Media is committed to ensuring the quality, integrity, and academic value of all publications through a rigorous peer review process. Peer review serves as an essential mechanism for evaluating the scholarly merit, originality, relevance, and overall quality of submitted manuscripts.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

The peer review process aims to:

• Assess the academic quality and originality of manuscripts.
• Evaluate the relevance and contribution of the work to its field of study.
• Provide constructive feedback to authors for improving their manuscripts.
• Support editorial decisions regarding publication.
• Maintain the integrity and credibility of published works.

2. Review Model

PT Altianka Literasi Media generally applies a single-blind peer review process, in which reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, while authors do not know the identities of reviewers. The Editorial Board may adopt alternative review models when deemed appropriate for specific publications.

3. Reviewer Selection

Reviewers are selected based on their expertise, academic qualifications, research experience, and publication record relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

Each manuscript is normally evaluated by at least one independent reviewer. Additional reviewers may be assigned when necessary.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Originality and novelty of the work.
• Academic and scientific contribution.
• Clarity of objectives and scope.
• Methodological rigor and validity.
• Organization and structure of the manuscript.
• Quality and relevance of references.
• Language quality and readability.
• Compliance with ethical and academic standards.

5. Review Outcomes

Based on reviewer recommendations, the Editorial Board may reach one of the following decisions:

• Accept – The manuscript is accepted without revision.
• Minor Revision – The manuscript requires minor improvements before publication.
• Major Revision – Substantial revisions are required, and the revised manuscript may be subject to further review.
• Reject – The manuscript does not meet the academic or publication standards required for publication.

6. Author Revisions

Authors are expected to address reviewer comments and submit a revised version of the manuscript within the timeframe specified by the editorial office. Authors may also provide responses explaining how reviewer comments have been addressed.

7. Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, distribute, discuss, or use unpublished materials for personal or professional advantage.

8. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could affect their objectivity. Review assignments may be declined when such conflicts exist.

9. Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editorial Board. Editorial decisions are based on reviewer recommendations, editorial evaluation, publication standards, and the scope of the publisher.