Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti (JMAT) is peer-reviewed journal interested in any aspect related to accounting, auditing, and information system. JMAT is ready to receive manuscripts on any aspect related to accounting. JMAT aims to disseminate research on accounting, auditing, and information system.

This Journal invites original empirical (qualitative or quantitative) research, literature reviews, theoretical or methodological contributions, integrative reviews, meta-analyses, comparative or historical studies on the following topics:

-  Financial accounting

-  Management accounting

-  Strategic cost management

-  Auditing

-  Tax

-  Information System

-  Behavior in accounting

-  Budgeting

-  Sustainability reporting

-  Corporate Social Responsibility

-  Environmental accounting

-  Capital Market

-  Shariah

-  Forensic

JMAT is a totally free access journal. Readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles without any charge. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees before being accepted for publication. 

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Open Access Policy

Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti (JMAT) provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public to supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

JMAT by RCEPM-LIPI is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://www.trijurnal.lemlit.trisakti.ac.id/maksi.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Peer Review Process

The review will be conducting two-step. The first step, after paper submitted, the editor will send to the relevant reviewer. The second step, the reviewer will gives a decision, either accept without revision or accept with revision or reject. Once paper accepts with revision. THe editor will send back to the author for revision. After that, the author then resubmits the paper. The editor will send back to another reviewer for the blind review process.  

 

Publication Frequency

Journal published twice a year in April and September

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Publication Ethics

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Hasil gambar untuk committee on publication ethics logo

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

Ethics For Editor

Editors of journals have responsibilities toward the authors who provide the content of the journals, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, the journal’s readers and the scientific community, the owners/publishers of the journals, and the public as a whole.

 

Ethics for authors

This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.  

Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavor.  Maintaining integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, which include:

The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration. 

  • The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full) unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’)).
  • A single study is not split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various journals or to one journal over time (e.g.  ‘salami-publishing’).
  • No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions
  • No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’). Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted. 
  • Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.
  • Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities - tacitly or explicitly - at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out before the work is submitted.
  • Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and therefore share collective responsibility and accountability for the results.
  • Upon request, authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the results. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc. Sensitive information in the form of confidential or proprietary data is excluded.
  • If there is a suspicion of misconduct, the journal will carry out an investigation following the COPE guidelines.  If, after investigation, the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. If misconduct has been established beyond reasonable doubt, this may result in the Editor-in-Chief’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to: 

1. If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author. 

2. If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction, either an erratum will be placed with the article or in severe cases retraction of the article will occur.

3. The author’s institution may be informed

 

Ethics for Reviewers

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, Authors and reviewers.

Ethics For Editor

Editors of journals have responsibilities toward the authors who provide the content of the journals, the peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, the journal’s readers and the scientific community, the owners/publishers of the journals, and the public as a whole.

Ethics for authors

This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. As a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) the journal will follow the COPE guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.  

Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavor.  Maintaining integrity of the research and its presentation can be achieved by following the rules of good scientific practice, which include:

The manuscript has not been submitted to more than one journal for simultaneous consideration. 

  • The manuscript has not been published previously (partly or in full) unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work (please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the hint of text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’)).
  • A single study is not split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various journals or to one journal over time (e.g.  ‘salami-publishing’).
  • No data have been fabricated or manipulated (including images) to support your conclusions
  • No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’). Proper acknowledgments to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions are secured for material that is copyrighted. 
  • Important note: the journal may use software to screen for plagiarism.
  • Consent to submit has been received explicitly from all co-authors, as well as from the responsible authorities - tacitly or explicitly - at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out before the work is submitted.
  • Authors whose names appear on the submission have contributed sufficiently to the scientific work and therefore share collective responsibility and accountability for the results.
  • Upon request, authors should be prepared to send relevant documentation or data in order to verify the validity of the results. This could be in the form of raw data, samples, records, etc. Sensitive information in the form of confidential or proprietary data is excluded.
  • If there is a suspicion of misconduct, the journal will carry out an investigation following the COPE guidelines.  If, after investigation, the allegation seems to raise valid concerns, the accused author will be contacted and given an opportunity to address the issue. If misconduct has been established beyond reasonable doubt, this may result in the Editor-in-Chief’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to: 

1. If the article is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author. 

2. If the article has already been published online, depending on the nature and severity of the infraction, either an erratum will be placed with the article or in severe cases retraction of the article will occur.

3. The author’s institution may be informed.

Ethics for Reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.  Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.  In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Standards of Objectivity & Competing Interest

Reviews should be conducted objectively.  Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s (or their associates’) work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

 

Subscribe Policy

Recently, there is no fee for submitted paper or access Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti.  

 

References Management

Every paper that was accepted and published in Jurnal Magister Akuntansi Trisakti, be suggested using  Reference Manager application, such as Mendeley.

 

Plagiarism Checker

Each submitted article to JMAT, must be free from plagiarism. We using Turnitin software to check that.

 

Publication Charges

No publication fee payable by authors.

 

Reviewer/Editor Join

Prospective reviewers should have an interest and passion to improve the quality of journals, and have competence in accordance with the scope of scientific journals. Prospective reviewers contacts the editorial secretariat for registration on the journal website. In this case, the prospective reviewers should fill out the Form Call For Reviewer as the data of the role of the user in journal site. As proof of the paper and its competence, the prospective reviewer must provide the link address or URL of a scientific site, such asa Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Scopus etc. 

 

Editor Responsibilities

The Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned guidelines. The author will be held responsible for false statements or failure to fulfill the above-mentioned guidelines. Editor has responsibility to check plagiarism with certain software

 

Author Benefit

By publishing with one of the fastest growing journals in accounting, you have benefits including:

  • Special identification with Digital Objective Identifier (DOI)

Each published articles in JMAT get DOI. DOI enables every published article to cite properly, thus provides accurate number of citations and also increase the visibility of the published work. This increases the impact factor of the author.

  • Wider collaboration and high visibility

Publication in JMAT, will open chance to get collaborative research both national and global scale. JMAT is an open access journal. Papers published in JMAT will receive higher citations than non-open access. Papers not only have higher total downloads, but also outstandingly higher visibility. 

  • Rigorous peer-review

Maintaining high editorial standards is JMAT priority. Every paper submitted is preliminarily assessed by Editorial Board who also guide formal peer-review process. 

  • Receive referee feedback in just over a month

We understand the importance of fast publication to you. JMAT takes advantage of its online medium by providing competitive publication times while ensuring a strict refereeing procedure. On average you will receive a decision within 33 days of submitting an article.

  • Author-friendly copyright

JMAT copyright statement allows you and your institution to reproduce, distribute and communicate the published version of your article to public.

  • Long-term archiving

JMAT is committed to ensure long-term access to its entire content and is preserved via LPFEB system. Hardcopy archives of JMAT are also stored locally at Perpustakaan Nasional.

  • Accepted manuscripts

Articles can be downloaded and cited within 24 hours of acceptance.