Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Persona:Jurnal Psikologi Indonesia is published by the Faculty of Psychology University of 17 August Surabaya, as a medium of communication and dissemination of research results and scientific work in the field of psychology. The Persona editorial is very open in accepting articles and book reviews related to our scope in the field of educational, developmental and clinical psychology

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Persona:Journal of Clinical, Developmental & Educational Psychology journal is a journal published by Faculty of Psychology Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya. The research article submitted to this online journal will be double blind peer-reviewed (Both reviewer and author remain anonymous to each other) at least 2 (two) reviewers. The accepted research articles will be available online following the journal peer-reviewing process. Language used in this journal is Indonesia.

For checking Plagiarism, Persona: Jurnal Psikologi Editor will screen plagiarism manually (offline and online database) on the Title, Abstract, and Body Text of the manuscript, and by using several plagiarism detection software (Unplag and Crosscheck). If it is found a plagiarism indication, editorial board will reject manuscript immediately.

Review Process:

  1. Editor recieving manuscript from author;
  2. Editor evaluate manuscript (journal aim and scope, in house style, supplementary data); (Rejected if not meet criteria)
  3. Editor screening for plagiarism on offline and online database manually; (Rejected if found major plagiarism, contacted author if found redunancy or minor plagiarism for clarification)
  4. Editor send manuscript to reviewer along with review form (double blind review, Both reviewer and author remain anonymous to each other);
  5. Reviewer send back his review form to Editor (with revised manuscript if necessary);
  6. Editor decision (rejected, require major revision, need minor revision, or accepted);
  7. Confirmation to the Author.
  8. If revision, author revised manuscripts and should be returned to the editor without delay. Returned later than three months will be considered as new submissions.

 

Publication Frequency

Persona: Jurnal of Clinical, Developmental & Educational Psychology published by Faculty of Psychology Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya, are scheduled for publication two times a year, in June and 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.

 

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

Publication Ethics Statement

Persona is a peer-reviewed national journal. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour 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 (Fakultas Psikologi Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Persona 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 author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.  

Fakultas Psikologi Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya as publisher of Persona 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 Fakultas Psikologi Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Persona 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.

Fair play

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Reporting standards

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, human, animals, 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.

 

Editorial

 

Journal Scientific Statement

The articles published in this journal are scientifically proved following the code of ethics of scientific publication. The code of ethics itself upholds three values of ethics in publications, namely, (1) Neutrality (free from conflicts of interest in public management), (2) Justice (giving the right of authorship to the beneficiary as the author), and (3) Honesty (free from duplication, fabrication, falsification and plagiarism (DF2P) in the publication. The articles published also follow the certain procedures or orders, such as blind review and revision process that consistent with the journal’s regular review, to ensure that the quality is maintained properly.

 

Screening Plagiarism

Plagiarism screening will also be conducted using Turnitin Online plagiarism detection.

 

Submission Process

  1. Open the persona journal page http://journal.untag-sby.ac.id/index.php/persona/index

  2. Click the Register menu

  3. Complete the requested fields

  4. After filling out the form then click send. You have already registered in the persona journal.

  5. Login to the persona journal using the username and password that was created during registration. Keep your username and password carefully because you will always use it every time you enter the persona journal page.

  6. After logging in, follow the steps for sending the script until your text is successfully sent online. If you have difficulties, please read the submit guide in the following link http://journal.untag-sby.ac.id/index.php/persona/pages/view/How%20to%20Submit.

  7. Make sure the text you are making refers to the persona journal writing guidelines. You can download the template here https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Gx0ftoDTjnWjFkJHbpPwEh9Qh45OigAv/view?usp=sharing

  8. The editor then looks at the shipment and evaluates it for technical compliance with basic journal standards to focus and scope, format, length and style of the environment.

  9. The editor then decides whether the text will be sent for review, or will be returned to the Author for technical revisions or suggested to be submitted to another journal. For technical revisions, the author is usually given two weeks (14 days) to revise the text. If extra time is needed, the author needs to send an email and notify the editor.

  10. After revision, the Editor then evaluates the subject matter of the submission and therefore contacts potential reviewers based on his assessment of their skills and skills in evaluating some or all of the content in the submission.

  11. If a reviewer refuses to conduct a review, alternatives will be consulted until at least two reviewers are assigned to the text. Usually, submissions will have three reviewers (including editors), but more can be recruited.

  12. Each reviewer independently evaluates the manuscript according to the criteria explicitly stated in the Review Guidelines, usually in two to three weeks (14-21 days). Each reviewer gives general and specific comments and makes one of the following recommendations to the editor: the

  • manuscript is received directly by the

  • text received with a minor revision of the

  • manuscript received with a major revision of

  • the rejected text

  1. After the review is complete, the editor sends an author an email review and comments on the revised script based on these recommendations and the Editor's decision.

  2. If a revision is recommended, after receiving a notification, the Author must answer via email if he is willing to make a revision. Usually, the author needs to return the revised manuscript within one week (14 days). However, if the author needs more time to revise the text, an email must be sent to notify the editor. (NOTE: Failure to meet deadlines will result in the Author having to submit a revised paper as a new shipment).

  3. The author revises and replies to emails with the system and the last file with revisions marked (or highlighted) to facilitate the determination.

  4. The editor then decides whether the text will be sent for the second review according to the decision taken.

  5. The article received then undergoes a layout process and the uncorrected draft is sent to the Author for approval.

  6. After receiving the uncorrected draft, the final print version will be uploaded to the First Online section, waiting for the final assignment of the Volume and Edition number.

  7. Print a journal copy can be requested in advance

NOTE: The overall duration of the review for the publication process usually takes around 45 to 60 days.