Publication Ethics

Transformatika is a peer-reviewed open-access journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior 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 Universitas Semarang, Indonesia. This statement is based on the current COPE's Core Practices.

Part A: Publication and authorship

  1. All texts sent will go through a strict peer-review process by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field.
  2. The review process is a blind review.
  3. The factors taken into account in the review are relevance, significance, originality, legibility and language.
  4. Decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If the author is asked to revise and resubmit the submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be reviewed.
  7. Acceptance of manuscripts is limited by legal requirements such as those that apply in the validity period due to copyright infringement and plagiarism.

 Part B: Author's responsibility

The author must state that their manuscript is their original work.

  1. The author must state that the manuscript has not been published elsewhere.
  2. The author must state that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  3. Authors must participate in the peer-review process.
  4. The author is obliged to provide corrections or correction of errors.
  5. All Authors mentioned on paper must significantly contribute to this research.
  6. The author must state that all data in the text is genuine
  7. The author must notify the Editor of any conflict of interest.
  8. The author must identify all sources used in making the manuscript.
  9. Authors must report errors that they found in the mass media published to the Editor.

 Part C: Reviewer responsibilities

Reviewers must keep all information about the manuscript and treat it as confidential information.

  1. Reviews must be done objectively, without personal criticism from authors Reviewer must express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  2. The reviewer must identify the relevant published work that has not been quoted by the author.
  3. The reviewer must also call the attention of the Editor in Chief for substantial or overlapping similarities between the manuscripts being considered and other publications that have personal knowledge.
  4. Reviewers may not review the manuscript where they have a conflict of interest due to a relationship, relationship, or competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with any writer, company or institution related to the newspaper.

 Part D: editor's responsibility

  1. The editor has full responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. The editor is responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.
  3. The editor must always consider the needs of writers and readers when trying to improve publications.
  4. The editor must guarantee the quality of the text and the integrity of academic records.
  5. The editor must make corrections if needed.
  6. The editor must have a clear picture of the sources of research funding.
  7. Editors must base their decisions solely as an interest, authenticity, clarity, and relevance of the paper with the scope of the publication.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions or cancel the previous editor for no serious reason.
  9. The editor must maintain the anonymity of reviewers.
  10. Editors must ensure that all research material they publish is by accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors may only accept scripts if they are sure enough.
  12. Editors must act if they suspect that they made a mistake, whether a paper was published or not published, and made all reasonable efforts to survive in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors may not reject papers based on suspicion; they should have proof of the error.
  14. Editors should not allow conflicts of interest between staff, writers, reviewers, and board members.