Peer Review Form

In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and the transparent management standards (Standar Tata Kelola) of Permendiktisaintek No. 9 Tahun 2026, Terra Alimentaria publicly provides the evaluation instrument used by our peer reviewers.

By making this form public, we ensure authors know exactly how their manuscripts will be assessed regarding originality, scientific rigor, and formatting.

Official Peer Review Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate the following dimensions of the manuscript in the OJS platform:

1. Title and Abstract

  • Does the title accurately reflect the contents of the paper?
  • Is the abstract concise (max 250 words) and does it clearly state the objectives, methodology, main results, and conclusions?
  • Are the keywords appropriate for indexing purposes?

2. Introduction

  • Is the research problem clearly defined and justified?
  • Is the literature review adequate, recent, and relevant to the study?
  • Are the novelty and objective of the research explicitly stated?

3. Materials and Methods

  • Is the study design appropriate and technically sound?
  • Is the methodology detailed enough to allow for replication by other researchers?
  • Are the statistical analyses appropriate and rigorously applied (e.g., proper replication, significance levels)?
  • Are ethical approvals (IRB/IACUC) clearly stated if human or animal subjects were used?

4. Results and Discussion

  • Are the results presented clearly, accurately, and logically?
  • Do the figures and tables enhance the text, and are they of high resolution and properly labeled?
  • Is the discussion analytical rather than merely descriptive? Does it compare the findings with existing literature?
  • Are the limitations of the study acknowledged?

5. Conclusion and References

  • Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?
  • Are all cited references relevant, accurate, and formatted strictly according to APA 7th Edition style?

6. Overall Recommendation Options

Reviewers must select one of the following final recommendations:

  • Accept Submission: The manuscript is suitable for publication in its current form.
  • Revisions Required (Minor): The manuscript requires stylistic, formatting, or minor textual adjustments.
  • Revisions Required (Major): The manuscript requires significant methodological clarification, re-analysis of data, or extensive rewriting.
  • Decline Submission: The manuscript is fundamentally flawed, lacks novelty, or falls outside the journal's scope.

Downloadable Review Form

Authors and prospective reviewers may download the offline version of our review instrument to understand the grading rubric used during the single-blind peer review process.

 ↓ Download Official Reviewer Evaluation Form (.docx)