Publication Ethics


Authors must not misinterpret research results that can destroy trust in journals, professionalism of scientific writing, and ultimately all scientific endeavors. Maintaining the integrity of research and its presentation can be done by following sound scientific principles, which include:

  1. Originality: the author must ensure that the entire contents of the manuscript have not been previously published (in part or whole) unless the new work is a development of the previous work. Authors must be transparent about reusing material avoid plagiarism themselves. Authors must check the authenticity of manuscripts that have low similarities with other authors' manuscripts. If the author wants to cite the work of other authors, he must mention the name of the author is cited.
  2. Multiple or Concurrent Publications: the author cannot submit manuscripts to more than one journal to be considered simultaneously. Submitting the same manuscript to other journals simultaneously is a less favorable publication behavior (less ethical).
  3. Source Acknowledgments: the proper acknowledgments of the work of other authors should always be stated. Authors must cite publications that will influence in determining the nature of the work written.
  4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors must mention any substantial or financial conflicts of interest that could affect the manuscript results that have been written, and all sources of financial support must be identified.
  5. Fundamental errors in published works: if the author gets a significant error or incorrectness in the proposed scientific work, the author must immediately notify the editor in chief of the journal or journal publisher and work with the editor in chief of the journal to retract or correct the submitted article.

The journal editors have responsibility for authors who provide journal content, peer reviewers who comment on the suitability of manuscripts for publication, journal readers and the scientific community, journal owners/publishers, and the public.



  1. Fair treatment: the editorial board of the journal will evaluate each manuscript submitted by the author regardless of the nationality, ethnicity, religion/belief, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and political philosophy of the author.
  2. Confidentiality: the journal editorial board cannot inform the manuscript that the author has submitted to any party other than the reviewers.
  3. Submission and Conflicts of Interest: material not permitted to be published by the editorial board may not be used for the benefit of the editorial board without the written consent of the author of the manuscript.
  4. Editorial Board Criteria:  journal editorial board, both national and international, must have H Index / Google Scholar / Scopus ID of at least one or have articles published in Sinta Index ( the Indonesian indexed national journals and reputable international journals).  The editorial board can assist reviewers to provide input on the manuscript in addition to the results of the reviewers themselves.
  5. Publication decision: the editor in chief of the journal will be responsible for the decision of the manuscript to be published by taking into account the interests of the author and the reader of the article. The editor in chief of the journal can ask for input from the journal's editorial board regarding applicable legal requirements related to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor in chief can consult with the editorial board or observers in making this decision.
  6. Manuscript Review: the editor in chief of the journal must ensure that each manuscript has been checked for the manuscript's originality. The editorial board of the journal assigns reviewers fairly and wisely. The editorial board explains the manuscript review process (peer review), which is informed to the author through the manuscript review mechanism. The editorial board must indicate the appropriate reviewer for each article by determining who is suitable for the scientific field and has no conflict of interest.



  1. Contribution to Editorial Board Decisions: Peer reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and editorial communication with authors and assist authors in improving manuscripts.
  2. Criteria for reviewers: observers, both national and international, must-have articles that have been published in national journals and internationally reputable journals. The reviewer should have published an article on the topic of community participation on the appropriate topic.
  3. Standard of objectivity: reviewers must act rationally, not allowed to comment on individual writers. The reviewer should provide clear direction with supporting evidence.
  4. Confidentiality: manuscripts submitted to journal editors for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewer not allowed to show or discuss the manuscript with other parties except with permission from the journal's editorial board.
  5. Conflicts of Interest: explanations obtained from reviewers must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewer, it is not permissible to review a manuscript with a conflict of interest due to competition, association, other connections with the author, or any institution associated with the manuscript.
  6. Source acknowledgment: reviewer should trace the sources of literature that the author has not cited. Relevant references must accompany each statement of observation of arguments that have been previously reported. The reviewer can request the focus of the editorial board's attention to the similarity in substance between the manuscript being reviewed and other manuscripts that have been published.
  7. Review Time: reviewer is expected to review the manuscript for two weeks and a maximum of one month and reviewers Manuscripts of at least one reviewer and a maximum of 2 reviewers.