Reviewer Guidelines

At The CAAGA Conference, peer review is a cornerstone of our publication process. Our reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring the quality, relevance, and integrity of all manuscripts submitted for publication. We adopt a double-blind peer review system to maintain fairness, confidentiality, and scholarly objectivity.

1. Reviewer Responsibilities

• Confidentiality: All manuscripts are confidential. Do not share, discuss, or use content for personal advantage before publication.
• Objectivity and Fairness: Evaluate based on academic merit, clarity, originality, and alignment with the journal's focus, avoiding personal bias.
• Constructive Feedback: Provide respectful and detailed comments to help authors improve the manuscript.
• Timeliness: Complete reviews within 4–6 weeks. If unable to meet the deadline, notify the editorial team promptly.
• Conflict of Interest: Decline the review if you have a conflict of interest (e.g., financial, academic, institutional, or personal ties).

2. Review Process Overview

1. Manuscripts are assigned via the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.
2. Reviewers access the full text and supplementary materials through their account.
3. Feedback should be submitted via the OJS form, including comments to the author and optional confidential notes to the editor.

3. Evaluation Criteria

Please evaluate manuscripts based on the following dimensions:

• Originality and Contribution: Does the work offer new insights or perspectives in public sector governance or related fields?
• Clarity and Structure: Is the manuscript clearly written and logically organized?
• Methodological Rigor: Are the methods appropriate and sufficiently described?
• Theoretical and Practical Relevance: Does the paper connect with relevant theory and practice?
• Referencing: Are sources current, relevant, and properly cited using the Chicago Author-Date style?

4. Reviewer Ethics

• Do not involve AI tools in evaluating or summarizing the manuscript’s content.
• Report any suspected cases of plagiarism, duplication, or ethical concerns to the editor.
• Reviewers may not directly contact the authors at any stage of the process.

5. Decision Recommendations

Reviewers are asked to recommend one of the following decisions:

• Accept without revision
• Accept with minor revisions
• Major revisions required
• Reject

6. Recognition and Acknowledgement

CAAGA appreciates the time and effort contributed by reviewers. We recognize your contributions with:

• Annual acknowledgment certificates (optional, with your consent)
• Opportunities for editorial board nomination
• Public recognition (where permitted)

7. Contact and Support

For questions or support related to your review tasks, please contact:
Email: editor.apsaejournal@apsae.id
Alternate Contact: principal.apsaejournal@apsae.id