Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

JIPAGS (Journal of Indonesian Public Administration and Governance Studies) memuat hasil penelitian bidang administrasi publik dan ilmu pemerintahan.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Review Process

OJS supports two models for managing the review process. The Standard Review Process is recommended because it steps reviewers through the process, ensures a complete review history for each submission, and takes advantage of automatic reminder notification, and standard recommendations for submissions (Accept; Accept with revisions; Submit for review; Submit elsewhere; Decline; See comments).

Select one of the following:


Editors will email selected Reviewers the title and abstract of the submission, as well as an invitation to log into the journal web site to complete the review. Reviewers enter the journal web site to agree to do the review, to download submissions, submit their comments, and select a recommendation.
 

Editors send Reviewers the request to review with the submission attached to the email. Reviewers email editors their assent (or regrets), as well as the review and recommendation. Editors enter Reviewers' assent (or regrets), as well as the review and recommendation on the submission's Review page, to record the review process.

Review Options

Review Time
The typical period of time allowed for reviews: weeks
Note: Can be modified during the editorial process.

Reviewer Reminders
Automated email reminders (available in OJS's default Emails) can be sent to reviewers at two points (while the editor can always email the reviewer directly as well):
 

days.
 

days after review's due date.
Note: To activate these options, the site administrator must enable the scheduled_tasks option in the OJS configuration file. Additional server configuration may be required to support this functionality (which may not be possible on all servers), as indicated in the OJS documentation.

Reviewer Ratings
 

Reviewer Access
 
Note: The email invitation to reviewers will contain a special URL that takes invited reviewers directly to the Review page for the submission (with access to any other pages requiring them to log in). For security reasons with this option, editors are not able to modify email addresses or add CCs or BCCs prior to sending invitations to reviewers.
 

Blind Review
 

 

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 Ethic

Scientific Publication Ethics at the Journal of Indonesian Public Administration and Governance Studies (JIPAGS) based on the COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors 

Duties of Authors
1.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.
2.Data Access and Retention:
 Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide such data within a reasonable time.
3.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.
4.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 behavior and is unacceptable.
5.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.
6.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.
7.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.
8.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.
9.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
 If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
  
Duties of Editors
1.Fair Play:
 An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.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.
3.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.
4.Publication Decisions:
 The editor board journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors 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 editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
5.Review of Manuscripts:
 The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
  
Duties of Reviewers
1.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.
2.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
3.Standards of Objectivity:
 Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4.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.
5.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.
6.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.

 

Complaints
Authors who may have complaints about their interaction with the Journal JIPAGS can send an e-mail to the Editor-in-Chief to: [email protected]

 

Article Processing Fee

Article Processing Fee

Jurnal ini menarik biaya dari biaya penulis berikut ini.

Penyerahan artikel: 0.00 (IDR)

Penulis tidak diminta untuk membayar biaya penyerahan artikel sebagai bagian dari proses penyerahan untuk berkontribusi pada biaya review.

Penerbitan artikel: 250.000.00 (IDR)