Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The aim of this journal publication is to disseminate the conceptual thoughts or ideas and research results that have been achieved in the area of community services. ABSYARA particularly focuses on the main problems in the development of the sciences of community services areas as follows:

  • Education
  • Science
  • Technology
that can be used to solve social issues, public health, economics, entrepreneurship, and community development
 

 

Section Policies

Vol. 1 No. 1

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Vol. 1 No. 2

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Vol. 2 No. 1

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Vol. 2 No. 2

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every article that goes to the ABSYARA journal will be reviewed by the reviewer in accordance with the theme of the article. Reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers (double-blind/blind peer-review method). Reviewers are given four weeks to review the assigned article. The editorial team will give a decision to accept or reject the article based on the results of the review conducted by the reviewer. If the reviewers give recommendations that are significantly different, the editor will assign 1 (one) additional reviewer to be considered in giving a decision on the article. The language used in this journal is English or Indonesia.

The author is expected to pay attention to the following points before entering the article in the ABSYARA:

  1. Articles are not the result of the plagiarism of other people's articles. ABSYARA will ensure that every published article will not exceed 20% similarity Score (Articles found with plagiarism more than 20% are automatically rejected and authors are advised if the article has a similarity (below or equal to 20%). Plagiarism screening will be conducted by Editorial Board using Turnitin® Plagiarism Checker.
  2. The article entered is never published and is not in the process of being published in another journal.
  3. The submitted articles are adjusted to the ABSYARA journal template.

Peer review is designed to assess the contribution, validity, relevance, quality, and often the originality of articles for publication. Its ultimate purpose is to maintain the integrity of science by filtering out invalid or poor-quality articles.

From a publisher’s perspective, peer review functions as a filter for content, directing better quality articles to better quality journals and so creating journal brands.

Running articles through the process of peer review adds value to them. For this reason, publishers need to make sure that peer review is robust.

The reviewer can state the following four views for the submitted manuscript:

  • Acceptance for publication
  • Acceptance for publication after minor revision (it is decided after revisions are checked by the editorial board)
  • Reviewing again after the major revision is done. After revision is made by the writers of the study, it is evaluated for the second tour.
  • It is not published (rejection)

After the reviewers’ evaluation is completed, views of the Reviewer are examined for at least two weeks by editors and field editors.

Editors and field editors give the final decision for the study by taking into consideration of views and suggestions of the Reviewer. The final decision is sent to the author.

Editor Feedback

"Pointing out the specifics about flaws in the paper’s structure is paramount. Are methods valid, is data clearly presented, and are conclusions supported by data?” (Editor feedback)

“If an editor can read your comments and understand clearly the basis for your recommendation, then you have written a helpful review.” (Editor feedback)

Peer Review at Its Best

What peer review does best is to improve the quality of published papers by motivating authors to submit good quality work – and helping to improve that work through the peer-review process. 

In fact, 90% of researchers feel that peer review improves the quality of their published papers (the University of Tennessee and CIBER Research Ltd, 2013).

 

 

Publication Frequency

ABSYARA: Jurnal Pengabdian Pada Masyarakat regularly published twice a year:

  • Issue  1: JULY
  • Issue  2: DECEMBER
 

 

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.

 

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... 

 

Guidance for Editors

As one of the users in the ABSYARA Journal, the editor has a vital role in maintaining the quality of journal management. Therefore, the ABSYARA Journal made a guide for editors that refers to the guidelines for editors recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Here are some things that editors should consider in reviewing a manuscript, namely:

  1. Is scientific research valid and presented, e.g. is the sample size adequate? Are results adequately presented and clearly explained? Did the researcher consider the possible bias factors? Does this study contribute enough to the development of science, and is it acceptable?
  2. Are there no ethical violations in the research process or in writing the manuscript?
  3. Does the script have more benefits than disadvantages?
  4. Suppose there is any doubt about a particular law or regulation. In that case, editors should clarify this with the authors and ask them to provide a letter from an agency's individual research ethics committee or research ethics committee.

The editor must also consider whether the manuscript sent by the author has met the focus and scope, guidelines, and template for writing articles in the ABSYARA Journal. In addition, the editor must also check the level of similarity of a manuscript using Turnitin software or something else.

 

Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

As one of the users in the ABSYARA Journal, the reviewer has a vital role in maintaining the quality and integrity of a manuscript that is entered into the ABSYARA Journal. Therefore, the ABSYARA Journal made a guide for reviewers, referring to the guidelines for reviewers recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Here are some things that must be considered as a reviewer, namely:

  • Professionally responsible
  • Objective
  • Punctuality in reviewing

Furthermore, during the review process, the reviewer must pay attention to the following points:

  1. Initial steps: Read the manuscript, supplementary data files (if any), and supplementary material thoroughly (if any), return to the journal if anything is unclear, and ask for anything incomplete that you need. Do not contact the author directly without the journal's permission.
  2. Confidentiality: Respect the confidentiality of the review process and refrain from using information obtained during the review process for the Reviewer's benefit or others or to harm or discredit others. Do not involve others in a manuscript review without first obtaining permission from the journal.
  3. Bias and interests: Reviewers must act reasonably, objectively, and not be racist. If Reviewers do not match the manuscript assigned by the editor, the reviewer should inform the editor about it so that other reviewers review it in their respective fields.
  4. Suspicion of ethical violations: Please inform the journal if the reviewer discovers an irregularity concerning research and publication ethics. For example, the reviewer may have a concern that an error occurred during research or writing and submission of a manuscript or may notice substantial similarities between the manuscript and concurrent submissions to other journals, or published articles or other ethical concerns, the reviewer must contact the editor directly about this and do not attempt to investigate for reviewer self. It is appropriate to cooperate with the journal but not personally investigate further unless it requests additional information or advice.
  5. Review diversion: If the reviewer has reviewed an article in another journal and was rejected and sent to the ABSYARA Journal, the reviewer should review the manuscript again. Because the manuscript may have been improved, and the reviewer already knows the manuscript's shortcomings beforehand.

Before commenting, there are a few things to note:

  1. Format: Follow the journal's instructions for commenting. If a specific scoring format or rubric is required, use the tools provided by the journal. The reviewer should be objective and constructive in commenting, providing feedback that will help authors improve the author's manuscript. Be professional, avoid being hostile or inflamed, and avoid making personal comments that defame or insult the author.
  2. Appropriate feedback: Remember that editors need a fair, honest, and unbiased assessment of a manuscript's strengths and weaknesses. The reviewer should recommend whether the manuscript is accepted/revised/rejected; each recommendation must match the comments given in the review. Make sure review comments and recommendations to the editor are consistent with the report to the authors.
  3. Language and style: use a language and writing style that the author and editor can understand.
  4. Suggestions for further work: The reviewer should provide suggestions if something is wrong or missing in the manuscript so that the author will add the information that they are referring to.

Accountability:

  1. Do not make negative comments that are unfair or include unjustified criticism.
  2. Do not suggest authors include citations to the reviewer's (or co-workers') work to increase the number of citations or increase your or your colleagues' work; suggestions must be based on valid academic reasons.
  3. Do not intentionally prolong the review process, either by delaying the submission of the review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from the journal or author.

 

 

Publication Ethics

The ABSYARA journal is a collection of articles for students, lecturers, practitioners, and others on Community Service (PPM) activities in the fields of Education, Science, and Technology. Each article is an original manuscript, does not contain elements of plagiarism, is not published in duplicate, and has been through a peer-review process to ensure the quality of articles. The editing team does not disclose any personal information about the manuscript to anyone other than the author and upholds objectivity in making decisions to publish articles.

Code of Ethics for Publication and Authorship (Authorship)

  1. All submitted articles must go through a peer-review process by two reviewers who are experts in their fields.
  2. All articles that have been submitted in the ABSYARA Journal will be checked for relevance, authenticity, writing procedures, and language.
  3. The decision taken is whether the article is accepted, accepted with revision, or rejected
  4. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit the article, there may be a guarantee that the revision will be accepted.
  5. Rejected articles will not be reviewed.
  6. Acceptance of articles is limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Responsibilities of the Author (author)

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscript is their original work.
  2. The author must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must state that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  4. Authors must participate in the peer-review process.
  5. Authors are required to retract or correct errors.
  6. The author must certify that all data in this paper are genuine.
  7. The author must notify the Editor of any conflict of interest.
  8. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscripts.
  9. Authors must report any errors they find in the published paper to the Editor.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

  1. The reviewer must keep all information about the paper confidential and treat it as privileged information.
  2. Reviews must be done objectively, without personal criticism from the author.
  3. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited.
  5. Reviewers should also request that the Editor in Chief notice any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published articles of personal knowledge.

Editor's Responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept articles.
  2. Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors must ensure the quality of articles and the integrity of the academic record.
  4. Editors must publish erroneous pages or make corrections when necessary.
  5. Editors must have a clear picture of the sources of research funding.
  6. Editors should base their decisions on only one importance, originality, clarity, and relevance of the paper to the publication's scope.
  7. Editors may not reverse their decision or overturn a previous editor's decision without serious reason.
  8. The Editor must maintain the confidentiality of the reviewer.
  9. Editors must ensure that all research material they publish complies with internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  10. Editors should only accept papers if they are reasonably sure.
  11. Editors must act if they suspect infringement, whether a paper was published or unpublished, and make all reasonable efforts to resolve the matter.
  12. Editors must not reject articles based on suspicion. They must have evidence of infringement.

Journal Manager Responsibilities

  1. Determine the journal's name, scientific scope, periodicity, and accreditation if needed.
  2. Determine the membership of the editorial board.
  3. Defines the relationship between publishers, editors, review partners, and other parties to a contract.
  4. Appreciate confidential things for contributing researchers, authors, editors, and review partners.
  5. Implement norms and provisions regarding intellectual property rights, especially copyright.
  6. Conduct a review of the journal's policy and submit it to the authors, the editorial board, reviewers, and readers.
  7. Create behavioral code guides for editors and review partners.
  8. Publish journals regularly.
  9. Ensuring the availability of funding sources for the sustainability of journal publications.
  10. Building a network of cooperation and marketing.
  11. Prepare permits and other legal aspects.

 

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Publication: 150.000 (IDR)
If this paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.