Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Penelitian Politik diterbitkan dengan tujuan menjadi media informasi dan wadah komunikasi di antara para akademisi atau praktisi untuk mengembangkan ilmu politik dan kehidupan perpolitikan di Indonesia. Tulisan-tulisan ilmiah yang dimuat dalam Jurnal Penelitian Politik memuat isu-isu yang berhubungan dengan masalah-masalah strategis yang terkait dengan:

  1. bidang-bidang politik :nasional, lokal, dan internasional;
  2. demokratisasi;
  3. pemilihan umum;
  4. partai politik;
  5. ekonomi politik;
  6. hubungan internasional;
  7. konflik;
  8. otonomi daerah;
  9. pertahanan dan keamanan;
  10. politik luar negeri dan diplomasi;
  11. dunia Islam;
  12. serta isu-isu lain yang memiliki arti strategis bagi bangsa dan negara Indonesia

 

Section Policies

Resume Hasil Penelitian

Naskah yang memuathasil penelitian yang dapat dilakukan melalui hasil survei, observasi, studi literatur, uji laboratorium, wawancara, dan/atau kuesioner.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Articles

Merupakan artikel ilmiah hasil pemikiran mendalam dan orisinal.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review Buku

Naskah yang memberikan paparan atau review atas sebuah buku kajian ilmiah.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted are initially screened by editorial panel for scope, relevance and scientific quality. Suitable manuscripts are sent for peer-review anonymously.

The articles submitted to this journal will be peer-reviewed by at least 2 (two) peer-reviewers and check for originality and plagiarism.

As the journal is peer-reviewed, a double-blind reviewed process will be followed.

The final decision whether the manuscript is accepted for publication is under the authority of editor-in-chief with regard from editorial board.

The accepted articles will be available online following the peer-reviewing process.

 

Bahasa Indonesia:

Reviewer atau mitra bestari Jurnal Pusat Penelitian Politik adalah ahli-ahli yang kompeten dalam bidang ilmu politik ataupun ilmu hubungan internasional, serta mampu bekerja secara profesional  dengan menjungjung tinggi kode etika publikasi ilmiah sebagai reviewer. Proses peer-review naskah Jurnal Penelitian Politik adalah sebagai berikut.

  1. Reviewer melakukan review (proses penelaahan) naskah sesuai dengan bidang keilmuannya. Apabila naskah tidak sesuai dengan bidang kompetensinya, berhak menolak untuk proses review dan dialihan ke reviewer lain yang lebih kompeten.
  2. Naskah yang di-review adalah naskah double blind review (tanpa identitas penulis dan reviewer), yang dikirim atau diserahkan oleh Editor Bagian atau sekreatriat redaksi.
  3. Reviewer melakukan review naskah berdasarkan substansi naskah (kualitas artikel), bukan dari aspek gaya bahasa (tugas copy editor) dalam jangka waktu maksimal 2 minggu sejak naskah diterima. Apabila dalam jangka waktu tersebut review naskah belum selesai, reviewer harus mengkonfirmasi ke Editor in Chief atau pemimpin redaksi jurnal.
  4. Selama proses review naskah, reviewer memberikan penilaian naskah melalui form/daftar checklist reviewyang tersedia pada aplikasi jurnal elektronik ini. Jika merasa kesulitan, reviewer dapat melakukan penilaian naskah secara manual pada form checklist review (format Ms.Word) yang dikirim oleh Editor Bagian atau sekreatriat redaksi.
  5. Naskah hasil review dikembalikan ke Editor Bagian atau sekreatriat redaksi.
  6. Reviewer memberikan keputusan naskah hasil review:
  • Accept Submission (naskah diterima).
  • Revisions Required (naskah perlu direvisi oleh penulis dan dikembalikan lagi ke reviewer).
  • Resubmit for Review (naskah sebaiknya direview oleh reviewer lain).
  • Resubmit Elsewhere (naskah sebaiknya dikirim ke penerbit jurnal lain).
  • Decline Submission (naskah ditolak).
  • See Comments (lihat komentar, reviewer menolak secara halus).

 

Publication Frequency

Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP)  menerbitkan artikel (dalam bahasa Indonesia atau bahasa Inggris), resume hasil penelitian, dan review buku. JPP terbit dua kali dalam setahun, yaitu bulan Juni dan Desember.

 

Open Access Policy

Naskah dan informasi lain yang tercantum dalam situs Jurnal Penelitian Politik ini bersifat open access dan hanya dapat digunakan untuk kepentingan pendidikan, penelitian, dan perpustakaan.

Ketentuan legal formal untuk akses artikel digital jurnal elektronik ini tunduk pada ketentuan lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-NonCommercial-No Derivative (CC BY-NC-ND), yang berarti dengan izin penulis, artikel dapat didistribusikan ke pihak lain bukan untuk tujuan komersial dan tidak merubah bentuk aslinya.

https://licensebuttons.net/l/by-nc-nd/4.0/88x31.png

 

 

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...

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP) (p-ISSN: 1829-8001 ;
e-ISSN: 2502-7476) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Research Center for Politics-LIPI is a journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles and case studies focused on nutrition as well as related topics that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication elsewhere. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly 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.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

 

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. 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. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: 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. 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.
  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

 

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
  4. 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

 

Bahasa Indonesia:

Jurnal Penelitian Politik adalah sarana publikasi artikel ilmiah yang memuat isu-isu yang berhubungan dengan politik lokal, nasional, dan internasional. Selain artikel ilmiah, Jurnal Penelitian Politik juga menerbitkan naskah berupa resume hasil penelitian dan review buku.


Dalam rangka menjaga kualitas naskah dan menghindari pelanggaran penerbitan atau plagiarisme dalam proses penerbitan, Dewan Redaksi menetapkan etika publikasi ilmiah Jurnal Penelitian Politik yang berlaku bagi penulis, editor, reviewer, dan pengelola jurnal. Pusat Penelitian Politik LIPI yang bertindak sebagai penerbit Jurnal Penelitian Politik memiliki tanggung jawab untuk menjamin semua proses penerbitan telah mematuhi etika publikasi yang kami miliki.

Etika Penulis

1) Pelaporan; penulis harus menyajikan informasi yang akurat mengenai proses dan hasil penelitiannya. Data yang digunakan harus diinformasikan kepada redaksi secara jujur, jelas, dan menyeluruh. Penulis juga harus menyimpan data yang digunakan dengan baik dan aman.

2)Orisinalitas dan plagiarisme; penulis harus memastikan bahwa naskah yang telah dikirim/diserahkan ke redaksi adalah naskah asli, ditulis oleh dirinya sendiri, bersumber dari ide dan gagasan sendiri, dan bukan menjiplak karya tulis atau ide/gagasan orang lain. Penulis dilarang keras untuk mengalih-nama-kan sumber referensi yang dikutip ke nama orang lain.

3) Pengulangan pengiriman; penulis harus menginformasikan bahwa naskah yang dikirim/diserahkan ke redaksi adalah naskah yang belum pernah dikirimkan/diserahkan ke penerbit jurnal/publikasi lain. Apabila ditemukan adanya “redudansi” pengiriman naskah ke penerbit lain, maka redaksi akan menolak naskah yang dikirimkan penulis.

4)Status penulis; penulis harus menginformasikan ke redaksi bahwa penulis memiliki kompetensi atau kualifikasi dalam bidang kepakaran tertentu yang sesuai dengan bidang ilmu terbitan. Penulis yang mengirimkan naskah ke redaksi adalah penulis pertama (co-author), sehingga jika ditemukan masalah dalam proses penerbitan naskah dapat segera dituntaskan.

5) Kesalahan penulisan naskah; penulis harus segera menginformasikan ke redaksi apabila ditemukan kesalahan dalam penulisan naskah, baik hasil review maupun hasil edit. Kesalahan penulisan tersebut mencakup penulisan nama, afiliasi/instansi, kutipan, serta tulisan lain yang dapat mengurangi makna dan susbtansi naskah. Jika hal itu terjadi, penulis harus segera mengusulkan perbaikan naskah.

6) Pengungkapan konflik kepentingan; penulis harus memahami etika publikasi ilmiah di atas untuk menghindari adanya konflik kepentingan dengan pihak lain, sehingga naskah dapat diproses secara lancar dan aman.

 Etika Editor

1) Keputusan publikasi; editor harus memastikan proses penelaahan naskah secara menyeluruh, transparan, objektif, adil, dan bijaksana. Hal tersebut menjadi dasar editor dalam mengambil keputusan terhadap suatu naskah, apakah naskah tersebut ditolak atau diterima. Dalam hal ini, dewan redaksi berperan sebagai tim seleksi naskah.

2) Informasi publikasi; editor harus memastikan bahwa panduan penulisan naskah bagi penulis dan pihak lain yang berkepentingan dapat diakses dan dibaca secara jelas, baik versi cetak maupun elektronik.

3) Pembagian naskah peer-review; editor harus memastikan reviewer dan bahan naskah untuk review, serta menginformasikan ketentuan dan proses review naskah secara jelas ke reviewer.

4) Objektivitas dan netralitas; editor harus objektif, netral, dan jujur dalam mengedit naskah, tanpa membedakan jenis kelamin, sisi bisnis, suku, agama, ras, antar-golongan, dan kewarganegaraan penulis.

5) Kerahasiaan; editor harus menjaga setiap informasi dengan baik, khususnya yang terkait dengan privasi penulis dan distribusi naskahnya.

6) Pengungkapan konflik kepentingan; editor harus memahami etika publikasi ilmiah di atas untuk menghindari adanya konflik kepentingan dengan pihak lain, sehingga proses penerbitan naskah berjalan lancar dan aman.

 

Etika Reviewer

1) Objektivitas dan netralitas; reviewer harus jujur, objektif, tidak bias, independen, dan hanya berpihak pada kebenaran ilmiah. Proses penelaahan naskah dilakukan secara profesional tanpa membedakan jenis kelamin, sisi bisnis, suku, agama, ras, antar-golongan, dan kewarganegaraan penulis.

2) Kejelasan sumber referensi; reviewer harus memastikan bahwa sumber referensi/kutipan naskah telah sesuai dan kredibel (dapat dipertanggungjawabkan). Jika ditemukan kesalahan atau penyimpangan dalam penulisan sumber referensi/kutipan, reviewer harus segera menginformasikan ke redaksi untuk dilakukan perbaikan oleh penulis sesuai catatan dari reviewer.

3) Efektivitas peer-review; reviewer harus merespon naskah yang telah dikirim oleh redaksi dan bekerja sesuai dengan waktu penelaahan naskah (peer-review) yang telah ditetapkan (maksimal 2 minggu). Apabila membutuhkan waktu tambahan dalam review naskah harus segera melaporkan (konfirmasi) ke sekretariat redaksi.

4) Pengungkapan konflik kepentingan; reviewer harus memahami etika publikasi ilmiah di atas untuk menghindari adanya konflik kepentingan dengan pihak lain, sehingga proses penerbitan naskah berjalan lancar dan aman.

 

Etika Pengelola Jurnal

1) Pengambilan keputusan; pengelola jurnal/dewan redaksi harus menjabarkan misi dan tujuan organisasi, khususnya yang berkaitan dengan penetapan kebijakan dan keputusan penerbitan jurnal tanpa adanya kepentingan tertentu.

2) Kebebasan; pengelola jurnal harus memberikan kebebasan kepara reviewer dan editor untuk menciptakan suasana kerja yang nyaman serta menghargai privasi penulis.

3) Jaminan dan promosi; pengelola jurnal harus menjamin dan melindungi hak kekayaan intelektual (hak cipta), serta transparan dalam mengelola dana yang diterima oleh pihak ketiga. Selain itu, pengelola jurnal harus mempublikasikan dan mempromosikan hasil terbitan ke masyarakat dengan memberikan jaminan kemanfaatan dalam penggunaan naskah.

4) Pengungkapan konflik kepentingan; pengelola jurnal harus memahami etika publikasi ilmiah di atas untuk menghindari adanya konflik kepentingan dengan pihak lain, sehingga proses penerbitan naskah berjalan lancar dan aman.

 

 

Article Processing Charge

There is no Article Processing Charge (APC) payable for an article once submission is accepted. No fee is payable by the author, or their institution or funder to cover the publication costs.

 

Article Submission Fees

No submission fee will be charged prior to the start of peer review.

 

Plagiarism Check

All new submissions to Jurnal Penelitian Politik (p-ISSN: 1829-8001 ; e-ISSN: 2502-7476) are screened for plagiarism using editorial, reviewer system and plagscan (www.plagscan.com) web based application.

 

Accreditation Certificate

Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP) (p-ISSN: 1829-8001 ;
e-ISSN: 2502-7476) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Research Center for Politics-LIPI has been certificated as a Scientific Journal by The Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) with Accreditation Number: 726/Akred/P2MI-LIPI/04/2016

 

References Management

Every article submitted to MEV Journal shall use reference management software Mendeley.

 

Copyediting and Proofreading

Every article accepted by Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP) shall be an object to writing-enhancement based on Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (KBBI) conducted by the Editorial Board.

 

PKP Private LOCKSS Network (PLN)

This journal utilizes the PKP Private LOCKSS Network (PLN) 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...