Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Focus and Scope of Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro (JNTE) are:

  • Electrical power and energy
  • Telecomunication and Signal Processing
  • Control automation and Robotic

 

Section Policies

Electrical Power and Energy

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Telecommunication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Control

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Publication of articles in Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro (JNTE) 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. JNTE acknowledged the effort and suggestions made by its reviewers. 

Initial evaluation of manuscripts

The Editor will first evaluate all manuscripts submitted. Those rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the  scope of JNTE. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to experts for review. At this stage, editors will check for possible similarities in submitted articles compared to other periodicals, journals, and conference proceedings previously published. The tool used is Turnitin similarity checker.

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 process of the manuscript at JNTE is conducted using double blind review process i.e. authors do not know the reviewers of their paper and reviewers do not know the author(s) of the manuscript that they review.

Review reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

  • Is original by stating the objectives and gap clearly
  • Is methodologically sound
  • 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 about the submission recommendation from among the following options: Accept, Revisions Required, Resubmit for Review, Resubmit Elsewhere and Decline Submission. 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. The differences between revision required option and resubmit for review option is after revised paper upload by the author, the further review is only carried out by the editor for the option of revision required. While for option of resubmit for review, next round review will be carry out by the previous reviewers.

.

Becoming a Reviewer

If you are not currently a reviewer for JNTE, but would like to be added to the list of reviewers, please contact us. The benefits of reviewing for JNTE 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 JNTE as part of your professional development requirements.

 

Publication Frequency

JNTE publishes three times a year i.e. March, July and November. 

 

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.

Benefits of open access for the author, include:

  • Free access for all users worldwide
  • Authors retain copyright to their work
  • Increased visibility and readership
  • Rapid publication
  • No spatial constraints

 

Archiving

JNTE stores back issues and current articles following LOCKSS idea of keeping lots of copies of our items on several servers to keep them safe. Archives are stored in Universitas Andalas' repository server, the university's Local Content Collection. Published issues are also sent to LIPI (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia) the Indonesian Institute of Sciences to be retained in its repository.

 

Fees

No fees incurred for submission, reviewing and publishing the articles .

 

Publication Ethics Statement

JNTE 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 (Universitas Andalas). 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 Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro (JNTE) 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 behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.  

Universitas Andalas as publisher of Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognise 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 Department of Electrical Engineering of Universitas Andalas and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. 

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient. 

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, JNTE  will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Jurnal Nasional Teknik Elektro 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.

Complaints and Appeals

JNTE will have a clearly procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to respected personal with respect to case of complaint. The scope of complaints include anything related to journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline.

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 authorised 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 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, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

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 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.

Authorship and Contributorship of the Article

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.

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.

Ethical Oversight 

If the research 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 in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from association or legal organization. 

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not. 


 

Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following penalties when plagiarism is identified in an article that is submitted for publication in JNTE. JNTE will use Turnitin's originality checking software as our tool for detecting similarities of texts in articles.

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.

It is understood that all authors are responsible for the content of their submitted paper as they all read and understand JNTE's Copyright and Licensing Terms. If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.


 

Retraction and/or Correction

Editors shall consider retracting a publication if:

  • they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabri.cation) 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  

Editors shall consider issuing an expression of concern if:

  • they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
  • there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case
  • they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive
  • an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time

Editors shall consider issuing a correction if:

  • a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error)
  • the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included)

The mechanism follows the guidelines from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

 

Reference Management

Articles submitted to JNTE shall use reference management software such as EndNote® or Mendeley

 

Indexed at

JNTE is indexed at DOAJ, Crossref, Indonesian One Search and Portal Garuda



 

  

.
Statistic and Traffic