Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The mission of KESPERA : Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat is to serve as the premier peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal to advance theory and practice related to all forms of outreach and engagement . This includes highlighting innovative endeavors; critically examining emerging issues, trends, challenges, and opportunities; and reporting on studies of impact in the areas of public service, outreach, engagement, extension, engaged research, community-based research, community-based participatory research, action research, public scholarship, service-learning, and community service.

Focus

KESPERA aims to provide a forum for national researchers on applied Society Development and Engagement to publish the original articles.

The scope of KESPERA are Society Development and Engagement.

This journal contains research-based community service results such as PAR (Participatory Action Research), ABCD (Asset Based Community Development), CBR (Community-Based Research), Service Learning, Community Development, and other methodologies.

This journal will be published on payment of an article-processing charge, and will be freely available to all readers with worldwide visibility and coverage.

 

Section Policies

 

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

In the reviewing process, there are at least three reviewers for each manuscript in the related topic. In addition, author(s) can also propose the candidate of reviewers. Judgement from the first reviewer will be main priority for editor to make decision, the review process will take 24 weeks

Generally, the candidate of reviewers will be chosen based on their reputation in publication number and quality. Next step, The Editor send the invitation letter for each candidate of reviewer. After the candidate of reviewer informed their availabilities for reviewing process, Editor create account for each reviewer and then send manuscript by OJS.

All reviewing process are in double blind review and managed by editor in the OJS.

Articles are evaluated on the criteria outlined below.

  • The appropriateness or fit for the mission of the KESPERA
  • The significance in contributing new knowledge (advancing a field of study; or providing best practices or lessons-learned);
  • The rigor and appropriateness of the scholarship; and
  • The readability and flow of the information and ideas presented.

Additional criteria based on the following manuscript types: as a research article, as a reflective essay; as a project with promise article; as a dissertation abstract; or as a book review.

 

Publication Frequency

KESPERA published twice in a year, April and October.

 

Publication Frequency

Publication information :

Jurnal KESPERA (ISSN xxxx-xxxx, E-ISSN xxxx-xxxx)

Short journal title :jkspr

For year 2020, Volume 1 Issue 1 are sheduled for publication.

 

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 and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics - Authors

  1. Reporting Standard: 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 details and references to permit others to replicate the work.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 which is not accepted.
  4. 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.
  5. 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.
  6. 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.

 

Publication Ethics - Editors

  1. 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. 
  2. Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a sub-mitted 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. Criteria of Editors: Editors, both local and international, should have a, minimum of H Index / Scopus ID or a paper or manuscript published in an International Journal with a Scopus Index, especially on the topic of Community Engagement. An editor can help the reviewers to give an input to manuscript beside the result of review by reviewer.
  5. Publication Decisions: The editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal to 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.
  6. Review of Manuscripts: Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated 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. 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.

Publication Ethics - Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer reviewers assist the editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author for improving the paper.
  2. Criteria of Reviewers: Reviewers, both local and international, must have a paper or manuscript which have been published in International Journal with a Scopus Index, especially on the topic of Community Engagement. And also the reviewers have been publish an article with the same theme with the manuscript that will be reviewing. Or the reviewer have a community engagement program with the same theme.
  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 relevant citations. 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.
  7. Time Periode of Reviewing: Reviewers should review the manuscript within 1 until 2 month (maximum). And total of reviewer every manuscript is 2 reviewer (minimum) and 5 reviewer (maximum).

 

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to KESPERA will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. KESPERA will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool, by a member of the editorial team. The papers submitted to KESPERA must have a similarity level of less than 15%.

Plagiarism is the exposing of another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. In order to properly judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

  • An author can literally copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the original source. This practice can be identified by comparing the original source and the manuscript/work who is suspected of plagiarism.
  • Substantial copying implies for an author to reproduce a substantial part of another author, without permission, acknowledge or citation. The substantial term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, is often used in the context of Intellectual property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.
  • Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more difficult form to be identified.

 

Reference Management

References of your manuscript must be up to date (in the last of 5 to 10 years and minimum of 20 references that 80% of the references is from journal) and your reference can be accessed by anyone. Format of the references for submitting manuscript on this journal uses style of American Psychologist Association. Please input your references using Mendeley Application to facilitate you as an Author. Download Mendeley Application.