Presentation

Does the manuscript present a cohesive argument? Are the ideas clearly and logically organized?

Writing

Does the title accurately characterize the manuscript? Is the writing concise, precise, and easy to follow?

Length

Which parts of the manuscript should be expanded, removed, condensed, summarized, or combined to improve clarity and contribution?

Title

Is the title concise and informative, omitting implicit terms and, where possible, stating the main result or conclusion? Are abbreviations avoided in the title?

Abstract

Does the abstract include: (1) aim/purpose of the study; (2) method; (3) key results/findings; and (4) conclusion/implications?

Introduction

Does the introduction clearly describe:

• The background and significance of the study in the relevant field of science;
• State of the art and relevant prior research to justify the manuscript’s novelty;
• Gap analysis and a clear novelty statement;
• Research questions and/or hypotheses, where relevant;
• The approach used to address the scientific problem; and
• The aim/objectives of the study.

Method

• Is the method described clearly enough for replication and evaluation?
• Does the section go beyond defining terms by explaining how the research was conducted?
• Are the research context/location, participants/data sources, instruments/materials, procedures, and data analysis techniques clearly stated?
• For quantitative studies: are variables, samples, instruments, statistical techniques, evaluation metrics, and validation procedures reported appropriately?
• For qualitative studies: are participants, research setting, data collection procedures, coding/analysis techniques, credibility strategies, and ethical considerations clearly explained?
• For experimental, applied, or multidisciplinary science studies: are the research design, materials, instruments, procedures, measurement protocols, data processing, and analysis methods clearly described?

Results and Discussion

• Are results presented as processed data, using appropriate tables/figures with clear captions and readable descriptions?
• Do the results address the research questions/objectives stated in the Introduction?
• Are findings compared with relevant prior studies in science, multidisciplinary studies, or related fields?
• Does the manuscript provide scientifically grounded interpretations for each key finding?
• Are theoretical, practical, social, technological, environmental, institutional, policy, or professional implications discussed where relevant?
• Are limitations and potential threats to validity clearly acknowledged?
• Does the paper identify future research directions or opportunities for extending the work?

Conclusion

Does the conclusion:

• Directly answer the objectives of the research;
• Provide implications and/or recommendations where appropriate;
• Appear as a paragraph, not bullet points or numbering?

Scope Fit for CJOSCI

Does the manuscript clearly relate to the scope of Cakra Journal of Science (CJOSCI), including conceptual thoughts, ideas, or research results in the field of science and multidisciplinary areas such as social and humanities, mathematics and natural sciences, maritime affairs and fisheries, agriculture and animal husbandry, religion and philosophy, economics and management, language and literature, art and design, tourism and hospitality, cultural sciences, social and political sciences, law, engineering, health, and medicine?