- Open Submissions
- Peer Reviewed
Peer Review Process
JPEM is a double blind peer-reviewed Journal. To ensure the integrity of the double blind peer-review for submission to this journal, every effort should be made to prevent the identities of the authors and both the reviewers from being known to each other. This involves the authors, editors, and reviewers (who upload documents as part of their review). Correspondence and all forms of published correction may also be peer-reviewed at the discretion of the editors. Typically, after a paper is submitted to this journal, a journal editor screens the manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. Only after clearing the initial screening is the manuscript sent to one or more peer reviewers. Finally, journal editors or the journal’s editorial board consider the peer reviewers’ reports and make the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript for publication. In general, to be acceptable, a paper should represent an advance in understanding likely to influence thinking in the field (see Focus and Scope).
Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. For instance, we avoid using people who are slow, careless, or do not provide reasoning for their views, whether harsh or lenient. We check with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review. Reviewers reserves the right to reject the script if the script review didn't match to the fields/expertise. Reviewers should bear in mind that all correspondeces in this journal contain confidential information, which should be treated as such.
JPEM are committed to rapid editorial decisions and publication, and we believe that an efficient editorial process is a valuable service both to our authors and to the scientific community as a whole. We therefore ask reviewers to respond promptly within the number of week agreed. If reviewers anticipate a longer delay than previously expected, we ask them to let us know so that we can keep the authors informed and, where necessary, find alternatives. In general, we need 1 (one) month to inform you about the results. Totally, review process for JPEM estimated time consuming up to 2 (two) months. For any general questions and comments about the peer-review process, the journal or its editorial policies that are not addressed here, we encourage you to contact us.
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.
Status of Submission Manuscript
We are committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted papers in JPEM. To maintain a high-quality publication, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to two or three reviewers, but sometimes more if special advice is needed (for example on statistics or a particular technique).
The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice, from among several possibilities: (1) Accept, with or without editorial revisions; (2) Invite the authors to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached; (3) Reject, but indicate to the authors that further work might justify a resubmission, and; (4) Reject outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.
Authors will receive information for submitting a final copy of their manuscript upon acceptance from the Editor. Once the article has been finalized for print production, the corresponding author will receive an e-mail by Editor. Page proofs for review will be sent to the corresponding author via e-mail and/or Open Journal System (OJS).
Receipt of final PDF file upon publication
Upon publication of the journal, the corresponding author will be able to download a free PDF offprint of the article through the journal site. Information on the terms and conditions regarding the use of the final article PDF for the corresponding author and/or any co-authors is available on the site.
In cases of serious errors that affect the article in a material way (but do not fully invalidate its results) or significantly impair the reader’s understanding or evaluation of the article JPEM publishes a correction note that is linked to the published article. The published article will be left unchanged.
Retractions (expressions of concern)
If the Journal receives a complaint that any contribution to the Journal infringes copyright or other intellectual property rights or contains material inaccuracies, libelous materials or otherwise unlawful materials, the Journal will investigate the complaint. Investigation may include a request that the parties involved substantiate their claims.
In accordance with the "Retraction Guidelines" by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), JPEM will retract a published article if: (1) there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation); (2) the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication); (3) it constitutes plagiarism; (4) it reports unethical research, and; (5) An article is retracted by publishing a retraction notice that is linked to or replaces the retracted article. JPEM will make any effort to clearly identify a retracted article as such. If an investigation is underway that might result in the retraction of an article JPEM may choose to alert readers by publishing an expression of concern.
Copyright without restrictions
JPEM allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
The submitted papers are assumed to contain no proprietary material unprotected by patent or patent application; responsibility for technical content and for protection of proprietary material rests solely with the author(s) and their organizations and is not the responsibility of JPEM. The main (first/corresponding) author is responsible for ensuring that the article has been seen and approved by all the other authors. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain all necessary copyright release permissions for the use of any copyrighted materials in the manuscript prior to the submission.
Policy on conflicts of interest
JPEM will only publish articles after the author(s) have confirmed that they have disclosed all potential conflicts of interest.
JPEM routinely modify our policies based on the demand and to respond the needs of the scientific communities. They are mainly related with addition, deletion, rearrangement of author names in the authorship or uploading newer form of the article based on the editorial/reviewer’s comments. If there is any request to add, change, rearrange the name of the authors before publication of the article, it must be sent to the editor of the journal by corresponding author with reason behind such changes and a written confirmation of agreement from all other authors (hard copy or scanned image).
Papers submitted to JPEM will be screened for plagiarism using iThenticate. JPEM Analysis will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism.
We suggest all of you using software MENDELEY, ZOTERO, or ENDNOTE for easily citation. References should be the most recent and pertinent literature available (about 5-10 years ago). Using literature (more than 10 years ago) maybe allowed at least 25% from total references who using in the manuscript.
Publication Ethics of JPEM
This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher IICET. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical JPEM or Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed JPEM is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher and the society.
Indonesian Institute for Counseling, Education and Theraphy (IICET) as publisher of this Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the IICET and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editors of the JPEM are 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.
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
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.
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.
Duties of Reviewers
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.
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.
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.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement 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.
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.
Duties of Authors
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 behaviour and are unacceptable.
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.
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.
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 behaviour and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment 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.
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.
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.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other 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.
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.
Licensing information of JPEM
JPEM is an Open Access Journal. The authors who publish the manuscript in this journal agree to the following terms:
JPEMl is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This permits anyone to copy, redistribute, remix, transmit and adapt the work provided the original work and source is appropriately cited.