Publication Ethics

Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Saga Komunitas (JPMSK) is a reviewed journal published by the Institute for Research and Community Service of the University of Respati Indonesia. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the process of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, chief editor, Editorial Board, reviewer and publisher.

Publication Decision

Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Saga Komunitas (JPMSK) editor is responsible for deciding which articles to publish. Validation of the work and its importance for researchers and readers must always encourage that decision. Editors can be guided by policies from the journal editorial board and are limited by applicable legal provisions, such as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors can negotiate with other editors or best partners in making this decision.

Justice aspect

The editor evaluates the manuscript at any time to the intellectual content of the author regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or political views of the authors.


The editor and every editorial staff must not disclose any information about the manuscript sent to anyone other than the author, reviewer, prospective reviewer, other appropriate editorial board, and publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Materials that are not published in a submitted text may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Task of Reviewer

1. Speed

Each selected reviewer who feels he does not meet the requirements / interests to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to study must immediately notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

2. Confidentiality

Each manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Manuscripts must not be disseminated or discussed with others unless permitted by the editor.

3. Standard of Objectivity

Review must be done objectively. Personal criticism from the author is not appropriate to convey. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

4. Source Recognition

Reviewers must identify relevant published works that have not been quoted by the author. The statement that observations, derivations, or previously reported arguments must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers must also state to the editor if there are substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscripts considered and any other articles published.

5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Information or ideas obtained in the review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers must reject texts where they have a conflict of interest due to competition, collaboration, or other relationships and connections with one of the authors, companies or institutions related to the manuscript. 

Author's Duty

1. Reporting Standards

The author of the original research report must present an accurate report of the work carried out and objective discussion of the significance of the research. The underlying data must be included accurately in the manuscript. A manuscript must contain sufficient details and references to allow others to imitate work. Reports of fraud or deliberately giving inaccurate information are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

2. Data Access and Retention

The author is asked to provide raw data related to the manuscript for editorial, and must be prepared to provide public access to the data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement of Data and Database), if possible, and must in any case save the data after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism

The authors must ensure that they have written the work completely original, and if the author has used the work and / or words of others, then this has been quoted correctly.

4. Double Publication, Redundant and Simultaneous

A writer may not publish a manuscript that describes the essence of the same research in more than one journal or main publication. Sending the same manuscript to more than one journal together is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.

5. Source Recognition

Appropriate recognition of the work of others must always be given. The author must quote publications that have been influential in determining the work reported.

6. List of Manuscript Authors

The author must be limited only to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research reported. All people who have made significant contributions must be registered as assistant writers. People or other parties who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or registered as contributors. The correspondence writer must ensure that all the authors are listed in the manuscript and there are no inappropriate authors, and that all authors have seen and agreed to the final version of the paper and have agreed to submit it for publication.

6. Dangers and Subjects of Humans or Animal.

If work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify this in the text.

7. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

All authors must disclose in their texts any substantive or financial conflicts of interest that might be interpreted to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscripts. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

8. Fundamental Errors in Works Published

When the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the work published, it is the duty of the author to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or refine the manuscript.