Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

semanTIK is one of the media publication of research results in the field of information technology. Research studies in this journal include Software Engineering, Computer Networking, Intelligent Systems, Information Systems, Robotics, Computational Science, Geographic Information Systems, and all topics related to informatics. The targets in publishing this journal are Lecturers, Students, and Researchers in IT.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the articles will be sent to Peer Reviewer process by two reviewers who are experts in the paper's field and will go to the next selection by Double Blind Review Process. After that, the articles will be returned to the Authors to revise. These processes take three months for a maximum time. In each manuscript, Peer Reviewer will be rated from the substantial and technical aspects. Peer Reviewer that collaboration with semanTIK is the experts in the Informatics Engineering and issues around it. They were experienced in the prestigious journal management and publication that was spread around the nation and abroad.

All submitted manuscripts are read by editorial staff. Those Manuscript evaluated by editors to be inappropriate to journal criteria is rejected promptly without external review. Manuscript evaluated to be of potential interest to our readership are sent to double-blind reviewers. The editors then make a decision based on the reviewer's recommendation from among several possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted.

The editor has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.

Every article that enters will pass an assessment based on the following rules:

  1. The journal must be in document format (* .DOC, * .DOCX)
  2. Following the semanTIK Journal Writing template
  3. The journal has authenticity and contribution to the field of Informatics
  4. The entry journal will be reviewed by a Reviewer for further revision by the Author
  5. Reviewers can reject the Journal that has not been revised until the time limit specified.
  6. Each the journal will be reviewed at least by a reviewer.
  7. The journal is reviewed at the earliest 3 weeks and a maximum of 3 months (12 weeks).
  8. Reviewers are determined based on their qualifications and competencies.

Review Process :

  1. The author submits the manuscript
  2. Editor Evaluation (some manuscript are rejected or returned before the review process)
  3. The blind peer review process
  4. Editor Decision
  5. Confirmation to the author

 

Publication Frequency

semanTIK is published biannually namely January-June and July-December. 

Detail Schedule :

a. January-June Period

  1. Submissions  : January-April 
  2. Review            : January-June 
  3. Publishing      : June
* Submit in May, will be published in July-December Period.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. July-December Periode
  1. Submissions  : July-October 
  2. Review            : July-December 
  3. Publishing      : December 
* Submit in November will be published in January-June Periode

Submissions on all topic related to  Software Engineering, Computer Networking, Intelligent Systems, Information Systems, Robotics, Computational Science, Geographic Information Systems, and all topics which related to informatics

 

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...

 

Screening For Plagiarism

The manuscript that submitted into this journal will be screened for plagiarism using :

1. Turnitin

2. Plagiarism Checker X

 

 

Digital Archiving

This journal utilizes the Indonesia One Search (IOS), Indonesian Publication Index (IPI) and GARUDA 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.

 

Publication Ethics

semanTIK: Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

semanTIK is a peer-reviewed electronic 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 (Informatics Engineering Department of Halu Oleo University). 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 semanTIK journal 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.  

Informatics Engineering Department of Halu Oleo University as publisher of semanTIK takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing 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. Also, the Informatics Engineering Department of Halu Oleo University 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 semanTIK 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 evaluates 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 Editor

The editor responsible for receiving submissions should be sent by the authors. In the process of editing the manuscript, the editor in conducting the assessment must still prioritize the weight of scientific articles were examined, with prejudice to race, gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality and political views of the writer. The editors are not allowed to conceal information about the article in question, except to the authors, peer Reviewers/Mitra Bestari, and publishers. If the manuscripts are accepted less worthy of publication, the editors must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript, so as not to be used by others, except by permission of the authors.

 

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.

Acknowledgment of Sources 

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The relevant citation should accompany any statement that observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. 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 behavior 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 behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment 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 conflicts 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 Work 

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.