Publication Ethics
The decision to which articles should be published is fully depends on editorial board’s decision. It based on requirements (originality, novelty, sociological perspective, and sociological references) that have to be on the article at Masyarakat, Jurnal Sosiologi. The editor may confer one another or with reviewers in making their decisions.
Authors:
1. Authors should adhere to publication requirements and author guidelines.
2. Authors must ensure that the manuscript is original, free of plagiarism.
3. Author should present their manuscript clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
4. The manuscript has not been published elsewhere and does not submit to other journal during the review process.
5. Authors should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their finding can be confirmed by others.
6. The research work in order to write the manuscript should have conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
7. Authors should take responsibility for submitted and published work.
8. The authorship of manuscript should accurately reflect individual contributions to the work and its reporting.
9. Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.
Peer reviewers:
1. Peer reviewers only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
2. Peer reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3. Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of data and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that released by the journal.
4. Peer reviewers not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
5. Peer reviewers declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.
6. Peer reviewers not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.
7. Peer reviewers must be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.
8. Peer reviewers should acknowledge that there are largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner.
9. Peer reviewers provide personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.
10. Peer reviewers recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process considered as a serious misconduct.
Editors:
1. Each editor must ensure that each manuscript initially evaluated by the editor for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so.
2. Editors can accept, decline/reject, resubmit for review, or request for revision of the manuscript based on requirement before it hand over to peer reviewers.
3. Editor forwarded the manuscript to blind peer reviewer who will make a recommendation to accept, reject, or modify the manuscript.
4. Editor must ensure that each manuscript reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
5. Editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors kept confidential.
6. Editor will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without written consent of the author.
Open Submissions
Peer Reviewed
