For Editor


  1. Publication Decision: An editor has the authority to accept, reject, or request improvements to the manuscript that has been submitted by authors based on input from reviewers and the journal environment. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Regarding manuscript decisions, editors can communicate with other editors in determining manuscript decisions. The editor is responsible for each manuscript that has been published.
  2. Manuscript Review: The editor conducts an initial review as a process that every manuscript that is entered into the journal by following the style of the journal's environment. The editor ensures that the peer review process is carried out in a discreet, fair and confidential manner. The editor must send manuscripts to reviewers that are relevant to their field and free from any conflicts of interest. The editor must ensure that the peer-review process is double-blinded.
  3. Fair Play: Each manuscript must be accepted based on the quality of its content without considering the gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author.
  4. Confidentiality: Editors must have an obligation to keep the author's information confidential.
  5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Every decision on the manuscript is based on the approval of the author. Editors must be free from any form of conflict of interest.



For Reviewer:

  1. Contribute to Editor's Decisions. Peer Reviewer provides reviews to consider the editor's decisions and also improves the quality of the paper. A reviewer can give consideration based on an objective assessment of the manuscript assigned by the editor.
  2. The reviewer maintains the confidentiality of the manuscript being reviewed. Each manuscript assigned by the editor is a confidential manuscript and must be used properly. The confidentiality of the manuscript requires that the reviewer must not discuss or even request personal data from the author without the editor's permission.
  3. Objectivity Standards. The reviewer must carry out the review process objectively without any interest or influence from other parties. The reviewer must provide notes on the manuscript based on clear arguments and support the statement.
  4. Source Acknowledgment: The reviewer must be able to ensure that all data sources used by the author are valid and accountable data sources. Reviewers must be able to notify the editor if they find discrepancies or irregularities in publication ethics such as the use of irrelevant data, plagiarism of published works, errors in double publication, or other suspicions with proper arguments.
  5. Conflict of interest. Various data related to the peer review process must be kept confidential and not for personal gain. Review assessment by reviewers must be free from conflicts of interest to produce quality and competitive manuscripts.
  6. The reviewer must be able to carry out the review task to the deadline given by the editor. If there are obstacles in the peer review process, the reviewer must notify the editor so that it can be replaced by another reviewer.
  7. Field Mismatch. Reviewers assigned to fields that are not following their field of study can notify the editor to reject the review process.



For Author

  1. Reporting Standard. The author must report articles from their research that is accurate and original. Each report made by the author is not manipulative, dishonest, and inappropriate data but must display the actual data. Manuscripts must have the rules of scientific work and reliable library sources that allow others to develop the work. Various forms of fraud presented by the author cannot be accepted by the journal manager.
  2. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications. The author may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. It is an unethical and unacceptable act. Publications originating from research projects must be identified the main purpose of their publication so as not to result in duplicate publications.
  3. The originality of the manuscript and plagiarism. The author must ensure that every work written is truly the original work that comes from his work. Authors must use appropriate citation/citing procedures when citing other people's works.
  4. Source Acknowledgement. The author must give acknowledgement to the source of data used in scientific manuscripts written using citations. This is a form of acknowledgement of the work of others that should be done in the procedure of writing scientific papers
  5. Article Authorship. Each individual in the authorship must representatively reflect the accuracy and contribution of the work and reporting of the scientific work. Authorship should be limited to every individual who writes and does the work. Every author who works significantly must enter the authorship. Each author has also agreed on the form of the manuscript to be published.
  6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Authors must be able to disclose all types of possible conflicts of interest in their writing and financing issues that are likely to affect the interpretation of their work. Any financial support associated with the manuscript must be disclosed
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works. If a fundamental problem is found regarding the published work, then the author must contact the editor to take steps to handle it, such as withdrawing or correcting the manuscript.