Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika invites original articles and not simultaneously submitted to another journal or conference. The Scope topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Software Engineering
    • Communication and networks
    • Data warehousing, filtering, and mining
    • Enterprise system development and resource management
    • Ethics and social issues related to technology
    • Knowledge management
    • Management information and database systems
    • Security and privacy
    • System development and process management
    • Usability engineering.
  • Artificial Intelligence
    • Agent System and Multi-Agent Systems
    • Big Data and Data Mining
    • Decision Support System
    • Image Processing & Computer Vision
    • Natural Language Processing
    • Explainable human-in-the-loop artificial intelligence
    • Trusted machine/deep learning

 

Section Policies

Articles

Editors
  • Fitri Indikawati
  • Faisal Rahani
  • Miftahurrahma Rosyda
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Software Engineering

Editors
  • Aji Prasetya Wibawa
  • Faisal Rahani
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Artificial Intelligence

Editors
  • Anita Kasim
  • Miftahurrahma Rosyda
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

  1. The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor for initial screening to the journal aims and scope, similarity level by using the Crosscheck/iThenticate Engine, methodological flaw, readability of the articles, and adhering to the submitted paper template. The similarity level must less than 20 % (Exclude Bibliography) and the similarity score to each other source is no more than 3%. The decision is rejected or accepted for a review process.
  2. These manuscripts will be sent to two reviewers anonymously by applying single-blind peer review.
  3. The anonymous reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses. Afterward, the editorial team meeting suggested the final decision to the revised manuscript by authors
  4. The decision of the revised manuscript will be then evaluated in an editorial board meeting, the final decision of whom are sent to the corresponding author.
  5. The accepted manuscript then continued to the copyediting and layout editing process to prepare the camera-ready paper.

 

Publication Frequency

This journal will be published 3 issues per year (February, June, October)

 

Open Access Policy

This journal is an open-access journal that provides immediate, worldwide, barrier-free access to the full text of all published articles without charge readers or their institutions for access. Readers have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all articles in the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika. 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

Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika, is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika, are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Section A: Publication and authorship

  1. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular manuscript.
  2. The review process is double-blind peer-review.
  3. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication.

Section B: Authors' responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  4. The authors must participate in the peer-review process.
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. The authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. The authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Section C: Reviewers' responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review 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.

Section D: Editors' responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of research funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

 

Retraction

The papers published in the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

 

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika 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 the Jurnal Sarjana Teknik Informatika must have a similarity level of less than 20% (Exclude Bibliography), and the similarity score to each source is no more than 3%.

Plagiarism is the exposure 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. To accurately judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

  1. 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.
  2. Substantial copying implies 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, being 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.
  3. 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.

 

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

Withdrawal Policy

The author is not allowed to withdraw the submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing the submitted manuscripts, and works invested by the Publisher. However, the authors could suggest the withdrawal if there is no updated progress review information after six months from our side.

Email for requesting withdrawal: jurnalsarjana[at]tif.uad.ac.id cc herman.yuliansyah@tif.uad.ac.id