Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil (p-ISSN 2339-2665) and (e-ISSN 2502-8448) published three time in a year, in April, August and December. The article can be product of researches, scientific thoughts or case study, in civil engineering and isn’t formed by politics, commercialism, and subjectivity unsure. This scientific journal contains articles of thought and research results in Civil Engineering that have never been published in scientific journals or other media. Any matters relating to the use of the software, citation and copyright permissions made by the author of the article, and the legal consequences it causes, are the sole responsibility of the author of the article. The format of writing scientific articles for publication in scientific journals should follow the guidelines of scientific article writing, which is located on the back of this scientific journal.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Publication of articles in Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil is dependent solely on scientific validity and coherence as judged by our editors and/or peer reviewers, who will also assess whether the writing is comprehensible and whether the work represents a useful contribution to the field. Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil acknowledged the effort and suggestions made by its reviewers.

Initial evaluation of manuscripts

The Editor will first evaluate all manuscripts submitted. Although rare, yet it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the aims and scope of the Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review.

Type of peer review

Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two to three experts who will be asked to evaluate whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, whether it duplicates the already published works, and whether or not the manuscript is sufficiently clear for publication.

Review reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original by stating the objectives and gap clearly
  • Is methodologically sound
  • Follows appropriate ethical guidelines
  • Has results/findings which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
  • Correctly references previous relevant work
  • Reviewers are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.

Decision

Reviewers advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article. The Editors will reach a decision based on these reports and, where necessary, they will consult with members of the Editorial Board. Editor’s decision is final.

Becoming a Reviewer

If you are not currently a reviewer for Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil, but would like to be added to the list of reviewers, please contact us. The benefits of reviewing for Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in related research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in our list of reviewers. You may also be able to cite your work for Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil as part of your professional development requirements.

 

Publication Frequency

Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil Published three a year:

  • Issue 1 published on April
  • Issue 2 published on August
  • Issue 3 published on December

 

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.

 

Plagiarism Policy

Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik Sipil Editorial board recognizes that plagiarism is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified in an article that is submitted for publication in Psikostudia Jurnal Psikologi. We are using Turnitin Similarity Check to submitted manuscripts.

Definition:

Plagiarism involves the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Policy:

Papers must be original, unpublished, and not pending publication elsewhere. Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source.

Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and also requires identification of the source; e.g., previous publication.

When plagiarism is identified, the Editor in Chief responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper in agreement with the following guidelines:

Level of Plagiarism

Minor: A short section of another article is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper.
Action: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made.

Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized without proper citation to the original paper.
Action: The submitted article is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year

Severe: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication.
Action: The paper is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.

If the second case of plagiarism by the same author(s) is identified, a decision on the measures to be enforced will be made by the Editorial board (Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial members) with the Chair of the Editor in Chief. The author(s) might be forbidden to submit further articles forever.

This policy applies also to material reproduced from another publication by the same author(s). If an author uses text or figures that have previously been published, the corresponding paragraphs or figures should be identified and the previous publication referenced. It is understood that in the case of a review paper or a paper of a tutorial nature much of the material was previously published.

The author should identify the source of the previously published material and obtain permission from the original author and the publisher. If an author submits a manuscript to Psikostudia: Jurnal Psikologi with significant overlap with a manuscript submitted to another journal simultaneously, and this overlap is discovered during the review process or after the publications of both papers, the editor of the other journal is notified and the case is treated as a severe plagiarism case. Significant overlap means the use of identical or almost identical figures and identical or slightly modified text for one-half or more of the paper. For self-plagiarism of less than one-half of the paper but more than one tenth of the paper, the case shall be treated as intermediate plagiarism. If self-plagiarism is confined to the methods section, the case shall be considered as minor plagiarism.

If an author uses some of his previously published material to clarify the presentation of new results, the previously published material shall be identified and the difference to the present publication shall be mentioned. Permission to republish must be obtained from the copyright holder. In the case of a manuscript that was originally published in conference proceedings and then is submitted for publication in Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik either in identical or in expanded form, the authors must identify the name of the conference proceedings and the date of the publication and obtain permission to republish from the copyright holder. The editor may decide not to accept this paper for publication.

However, an author shall be permitted to use material from an unpublished presentation, including visual displays, in a subsequent journal publication. In the case of a publication being submitted, that was originally published in another language, the title, date, and journal of the original publication must be identified by the authors, and the copyright must be obtained. The editor may accept such a translated publication to bring it to the attention of a wider audience. The editor may select a specific paper that had been published (e.g. a “historic” paper) for republication in order to provide a better perspective of a series of papers published in one issue of PKurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik. This republication shall be clearly identified as such and the date and journal of the original publication shall be given, and the permission of the author(s) and the publisher shall be obtained.

The Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik layout editor for the Journal is responsible for maintaining the list of authors subjected to penalties and will check that no authors of a submitted paper are on this list. If a banned author is identified, the layout editor will inform the Editor-in-Chief who will take appropriate measures. This policy will be posted on the website with the instructions for submitting a manuscript, and a copy will be sent to the authors with the confirmation email upon initial receipt of their original manuscript.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik is a peer-reviewed 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. This statement is based on COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

Duties of Authors Reporting Standards:

  1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  2. Data Access and Retention:
    Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism:
    The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication:
    An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  5. Acknowledgment of Sources:
    Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  6. Authorship of the Paper:
    Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
    All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  8. Fundamental errors in published works:
    When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects:
    If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Duties of Editors

  1. Fair Play:
    An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  2. Confidentiality:
    The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
    Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
  4. Publication Decisions:
    The editor board journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
  5. Review of Manuscripts:
    The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:<
    Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  2. Promptness:
    Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process
  3. Standards of Objectivity:
    Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Confidentiality:
    Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:
    Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. 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.
  6. Acknowledgment of Sources:
    Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

 

Retraction Policy

The papers published in Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik will be considered for a retraction if :

  • They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  • the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  • it constitutes plagiarism
  • it reports unethical research
  • The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at COPE’s Committee on Publication Ethics Retraction Guidelines.

 

Article Processing Charges

No fees incurred for article processing, submission, neither reviewing the articles.

Under the aforementioned condition, we are waiving in full for authors from developing countries should they need to submit papers to Kurva S: Jurnal Keilmuan dan Aplikasi Teknik.

However, should authors or other parties needed print/hard copies of the journal, an IDR 150.000/copy should be paid for the printing and binding.

Please send us an email stating your interest in printed copies and receive further details.