Focus and Scope

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

All submissions follow a double blind review process, that is, the identity of authors is never revealed to reviewers throughout the review process and vice versa. On the whole, the evaluation process lasts four months approximately. First, each manuscript is sent to two reviewers who can accept, reject, or suggest that the manuscript be revised and resubmitted. In case the evaluations of the two reviewers are at variance, the following is a summary of the steps that will be taken:

Evaluation 1: Accept Recommendation: Revise and resubmit
Evaluation 2: Revise and resubmit

Evaluation 1: Reject Recommendation: Reject
Evaluation 2: Revise and resubmit

Evaluation 1: Accept Recommendation: Send to a third reviewer. The two concepts (out of the three) that are similar at the end of the evaluation process will be used to decide on whether to accept or reject the manuscript.
Evaluation 2: Reject
If an article requires major changes it will be returned to the author with the recommendation: revise and resubmit. The author will be given three weeks to revise the manuscript; failure to comply with this deadline will result in the manuscript being considered as a new submission. Once the revised version is received it will be sent to the two original reviewers (or the third one, if applicable) for their final evaluation. The editing process will start once the article is accepted after having been read by members of the editorial committee and the advisory board. Authors should be ready to revise it if necessary and the edited version will be sent to the author for approval. Authors will be given deadlines to revise the manuscript throughout the process of edition as well; final acceptance and date of publication of the manuscript depend on the timely response to such deadlines.

Duties Expected of the Editor

The Editor is responsible for maintaining the quality of the contents of the journal and, as such, has the final say on whether to accept or reject a manuscript.

The Editor ensures that all submissions comply with the editorial policies and the guidelines for authors found on the journal website and in the print version.

The Editor guarantees that all authors are treated fairly and their manuscripts evaluated without regard to the authors’ race, gender, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, political philosophy, ethnic origin, institutional affiliation, or citizenship.

The Editor is expected to be in constant communication with authors and reviewers about the status of a manuscript or about any other issue that may arise along the process of submission, evaluation, and selection of manuscripts and which requires the attention of some or all of the parties involved.

Initially, the Editor assigns two reviewers for each manuscript taking into account the reviewers’ areas of interest. The Editor must also ensure the double-blind nature of the review process. When the two concepts from the evaluators are at odds, the Editor must select a third reviewer. In the end, the Editor must consider all the factors present along the evaluation of a manuscript to reach a final decision.

The Editor treats with confidentiality all the information gathered throughout the submission, evaluation, and selection of a manuscript, disclosing only what is necessary for the purposes of evaluation and edition and to the incumbent parties.

The Editor refers to the policies of the journal, the guidelines for authors, or the present declaration to decide on cases of unethical behavior (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, parallel submission). However, when another issue of a legal nature not contemplated in the abovementioned documents arises, the Editor will resort to the Editorial Committee to define the course of action.

Duties Expected of the Author

The Author submits manuscripts that follow standards of academic writing and that are based on original research. The manuscript should advance the knowledge in the field by presenting data that are easily replicated and relevant to interested readers. Falsification and manipulation of data are unethical and unacceptable behaviors.

The Author should consult and comply with the guidelines for authors and the editorial policies of the journal prior to the submission of a manuscript.

The Author must be aware that practices like parallel submission (sending the same manuscript simultaneously to other journals), plagiarism, and self-plagiarism are unacceptable. All manuscripts with evidence of any of those practices will be immediately rejected and no future submissions from the same author will be considered for evaluation.

The Author properly cites all works used in the composition of the manuscript. A list of all the references cited is included at the end of the manuscript (following the MLA style, 7th ed., as stated in the guidelines for authors).

The authorship of a manuscript is only granted to the people who made significant contributions either during the development of the study or during the composition of the manuscript. The inclusion of “guest authors” (people who did not actually collaborate at any point but who, for some reason, are listed as authors) or the omission of “ghost authors” (authors who made significant contribution but who are not listed as authors) are unethical and unacceptable practices. People who made minor contributions can be labelled as collaborators and their help mentioned in an acknowledgement note at the end of the manuscript.

The maximum number of authors per submission to the HORTATORI journal is three. In this case, the corresponding author makes sure that the co-authors agree with the version of the manuscript submitted for evaluation or with that which results after a process of revision and resubmission.

The Author sends the consent form used to obtain authorization from participants (if these are present) in order to reproduce the information gathered from them. For underage participants, the consent form must be signed by their legal guardians.

The Author ensures the anonymity of the participants involved in a given study either by giving them pseudonyms or by using codes to identify them.

The Author must obtain permission to replicate all copyrighted material used within the manuscript. This permission should be sent together with the manuscript.

The Author discloses any potential conflict of interest that may originate along the process of evaluation. The Author is also required to give information about the funding sources of the study described in the manuscript.

The Author maintains a respectful and professional tone in the communication with the Editor and in the comments addressed to the Reviewers. The Author is entitled to object to any evaluation if it is considered poorly carried out.

The Author promptly informs the Editor of any error that may be found in an article after its publication. The Author and the Editor will work together to try and fix the error in the best way possible. An erratum may be issued and, in extreme cases, the article may be retracted altogether.

If the work described in the manuscript involves animal subjects, psychological procedures, or any hazardous element (e.g., chemicals), the Author provides the necessary information to verify that the international ethical standards for these cases were properly followed.

Duties Expected of the Reviewer

Based on their expertise, reviewers assist the Editor in the evaluation and selection of manuscripts.

Reviewers respond promptly to the Editor’s evaluation requests, whether to accept them or decline them.

Reviewers comply with the deadline established by the Editor to complete the review. The corresponding evaluation form must be adequately filled in and reviewers are also entitled to write comments to the authors directly on the manuscript. Reviewers perform their evaluations in a respectful and objective manner, trying to give the necessary arguments to support their comments or suggestions.

As part of the evaluation process, reviewers treat the information used or produced with confidentiality.

Reviewers also disclose any potential conflict of interest as well as any other major problem that they may detect during evaluation (falsification of data, plagiarism, parallel submission, etc.).

Publication Frequency

JURNAL TERBIT BULAN JUNI DAN DESEMBER

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

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 Publication Malpractice Statement

The purpose of this declaration is to clarify the expected duties and ethical behavior for all the parties involved in the process of submission, evaluation, and selection of manuscripts sent to the USAHA journal.

Author(s) duties

Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of their research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Authors also must ensure that their work is entirely original, and therefore wherever and whenever the work and/or words of others are used, all instances must be appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication. Some articles (especially Reviews) may contain figures, tables, or text is taken from other publications, for which Journal USAHA is an Open Access Journal that does not hold the copyright or the right to re-license the published material. Please note that the author(s) should inquire with the original copyright holder (usually the original publisher or authors), whether or not this material can be re-used.

Editor(s) duties 
Editors evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. The editor does not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Whenever ethical complaints are filed concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, editors must take reasonable action to ensure that proper compliance with ethical standards is restored. 
The editor should evaluate the manuscripts initially without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, etc. Submitted information and ideas must be kept confidential and cannot be used for personal advantage or gain. Editors should pass the final acceptance only after discussion with the other managing and co-editors and reviewers based on the compliance, originality, and quality of the article. It is the duty of editors to correct the articles if demand comes from authors. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken at the time of processing of the article. The editor should address and take sufficient steps about ethical complaints to the published data and/or methodologies. Further communications should be made to the corresponding authors.

Reviewer(s) duties
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any appointed reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or is otherwise aware that a prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor and step down from the review process. 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.

Others
Journal USAHA is an Open Access Journal publication ethics and publication malpractice statement are mainly referring to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The present statement is committed to ensuring publication ethics and quality of articles intended for publication in Journal USAHA is an Open Access Journal. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers. Suggested information for COPE: (1) Guidelines for the Board of Directors of Learned Society Journals; (2) Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing; (3) Code of Conduct of Journal Publisher. Detailed information about COPE, please visit http://publicationethics.org/

Article processing charges (APCs)

The amount of APCs is 350.000 (IDR). The APC, payable when only due once the author knows the manuscript is accepted by the editorial team and ready for publication. The APC is charged to either you or your funder, institution, or employer. Authors can request that the invoice be sent to their institution or funder.

The sample journal reprint is only available by special request. Please contact Jurnal USAHA Support Center for more information.

The payments for APC only can be done via Bank Transfer to the below address.

Bank Transfer: 
Account Name: Dewi Purwaningsih
Account No.: 3168-1000-2980
Bank: Bank OCBC NISP
Branch 

All of the proof of payment can submit to email: tedyardiansy4h@gmail.com

Copyright Notice

View My Stats