Policies

Editorial Policies

Section Policies

Original Research

Original research manuscript reports finding of empirical studies (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods designs). We welcome empirical study reports that have significant contributions towards the understanding of particular phenomena, regardless whether the results is/is not supporting the hypothesis, as long as the methods are appropriate and robust and the study is discussed within the indigenous perspective. We also accept report of replicable studies. The maximum length for this manuscript is 6,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 200 words for each language), main text, references, tables, and figures.

 

Literature Review

This type of manuscript focuses on critical analysis of a particular topic, in either a narrative or systematic review. Literature review manuscript must address an important study gap. The manuscript must include method section, which details the process of choosing studies for analysis (the databases use, study criteria, etc.). Meta-analysis is encouraged in the systematic review manuscript. The maximum length for a literature review manuscript is 6,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 200 words for each language), main text, references, tables, and figures.

Brief Report

Brief report papers report a pilot or ongoing empirical study. This type of manuscript allows a rapid dissemination of findings of cutting-edge topics that are parts of the ongoing project. The maximum length for a brief report manuscript is 3,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 100 words for each language), main text, tables, figures, and a maximum of 8 references.

Commentary Paper

A critical opinion or comment of contemporary topics or phenomena to increase scholars’ awareness and to encourage future studies. A commentary paper should identify an important yet understudied areas and is expressed in a critical and scientific style. The maximum length for a commentary paper is 3,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 100 words for each language), main text, tables, figures, and a maximum of 8 references.

Editorial Note

This is a commentary note typically shared by the Editor or invited authors and are usually reviewed by the editors.

 

Peer Review Process

Publication Frequency

JPU has a regular publication schedule on every June and December.

Open Access Policy

 

JPU provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public and to support 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...

Indexing

 

Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat (JPU) is currently indexed in:

• ICI Copernicus
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
• Google Scholar
• Science and Technology Index (Indonesian Government) - SINTA
• Indonesia One Search
• Portal Garuda
• Dimensions

 

Publication Ethics

The printable version of Publication Ethics could be downloaded here.

 

GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND FRAMEWORK

Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat (JPU) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, transparency, and ethical scholarly publishing. The journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and Guidelines, with additional reference to the recommendation of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations where applicable.

 

All parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, are expected to uphold the principles of honesty, fairness, accountability, confidentiality, and respect for research participants and intellectual property.

JPU does not tolerate fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate data or image manipulation, duplicate or redundant publication, authorship misrepresentation, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, or other practices that undermine research integrity.

The journal is committed to addressing ethical concerns fairly and transparently, whether they arise before or after publication. Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with ethical standards.

 

EDITOR’S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

General Duties and Responsibilities

The Editor is accountable for the content published in the journal and is responsible for safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record. The Editor shall strive to meet the needs of readers and authors, continuously improve the journal, uphold academic freedom and freedom of expression, and prevent commercial, personal, or institutional interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.

Editorial decisions shall be independent of the publisher, sponsoring institutions, and commercial interests. The Editor must maintain neutrality, objectivity, and fairness when handling submissions, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, political ideology, or institutional affiliation.

 

Editorial Decisions

The Editor is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are eligible for publication based on their scholarly merit, originality, clarity, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, and compliance with ethical standards.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by personal bias, conflicts of interest, commercial considerations, or external pressure.

The Editor should not reverse an acceptance decision solely because of a change in editorial preference. Reconsideration after acceptance should be limited to circumstances involving substantive errors, serious ethical concerns, or evidence that the publication process has been compromised.

The Editor shall follow relevant COPE guidance when concerns arise regarding the integrity of a submission or a published article.

 

Confidentiality

The Editor and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts and related communications as confidential. Information about a manuscript must not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate to their roles.

Manuscripts must be handled according to the journal's double-blind peer-review process. Editors and editorial staff must not disclose the identities of authors or reviewers except as required by the review process or applicable legal obligations.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the Editor's own research without the authors' explicit written permission.

 

Peer Review

The Editor must ensure that submissions undergo a fair, unbiased, confidential, and timely double-blind peer-review process, consistent with the journal's stated review procedures.

Reviewers shall be selected based on relevant expertise, independence, and the absence of conflicts of interest that could compromise their assessment. The Editor shall take reasonable steps to verify reviewer identities and suitability and to promote fairness and diversity in reviewer selection.

The Editor must address suspected manipulation of peer review, including fabricated reviewer identities, inappropriate interference in reviewer selection, or other practices intended to compromise editorial evaluation.

 

Quality Assurance and Research Integrity

The Editor shall take reasonable measures to ensure the quality, ethical integrity, and transparency of published content. These measures may include plagiarism screening, examination of concerns about data or image integrity, and requests for supporting data, research instruments, ethical approval documentation, or additional clarification when necessary.

Similarity-detection scores alone do not establish plagiarism. The Editor shall consider the nature, extent, context, and attribution of overlapping material when evaluating potential plagiarism or redundant publication.

When credible concerns arise, the Editor shall assess the available evidence and determine whether further clarification, independent assessment, or consultation with the relevant institution is warranted.

 

Submissions by the Editor

Editors may submit their own work to JPU. Such submissions must undergo the same standards of evaluation as other manuscripts and must be handled independently by an editor without a relevant conflict of interest.

The submitting Editor must not participate in editorial decisions concerning their manuscript or exercise influence over reviewer selection, review outcomes, or publication decisions.

 

Complaints, Appeals, and Allegations of Misconduct

The Editor shall ensure that complaints concerning the journal, its editorial processes, or its personnel are handled fairly, confidentially, and impartially.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing a reasoned explanation identifying substantive scientific, methodological, ethical, or procedural concerns. Appeals shall be reviewed by the Editor or, where appropriate, an independent editor who was not responsible for the original decision and has no relevant conflict of interest.

Complaints concerning the Editor-in-Chief shall be referred to an independent editorial representative, the publisher, or the journal's sponsoring organization, as appropriate.

Credible allegations of research or publication misconduct shall be assessed in accordance with relevant COPE guidance. The process may involve an initial assessment, requests for clarification and supporting documentation, independent expert consultation, and communication with the relevant institution or research-integrity body where warranted.

Authors shall ordinarily be given an appropriate opportunity to respond to concerns relevant to them. The Editor shall distinguish between honest error, unresolved suspicion, and substantiated misconduct. The journal will document the process and maintain confidentiality to the extent possible, subject to legitimate investigative, legal, and ethical requirements.

Possible actions include rejection of a manuscript, correction of a published article, an expression of concern, retraction, or notification of an appropriate institution or other body when justified.

 

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The Editor shall take appropriate action when significant errors, ethical breaches, or misconduct are identified in published articles, in accordance with COPE guidance.

A correction may be issued when a material error affects the accuracy or interpretation of an article but does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.

A retraction may be considered when there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable because of major error, fabrication, or falsification; when the article constitutes plagiarism or undisclosed redundant publication; when research was conducted unethically; when the publication process was materially compromised; or when other serious concerns undermine the integrity of the published work.

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial concerns about a published article remain unresolved and the available evidence is insufficient for a final decision, or when an investigation is ongoing and readers need to be alerted to a potential problem.

Correction, retraction, and expression-of-concern notices must be clearly identified, freely accessible, and linked to the original article. Retraction notices must state the reason for retraction and identify who is retracting the article. The original article will normally remain accessible in the scholarly record, clearly marked as retracted. Removal of article content shall be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as legal requirements or serious risks to personal safety, while preserving an appropriate bibliographic record.

 

Conflict of Interests

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage financial and non-financial conflicts of interest. An Editor must recuse themselves from handling a manuscript when a conflict could reasonably compromise their impartiality.

The journal shall arrange for an independent editor to handle the manuscript when necessary. Conflicts identified after publication shall be assessed and addressed through appropriate editorial action.

 

Use of Artificial Intelligence

Editors may use AI tools for appropriate administrative or technical assistance, provided that confidentiality, data protection, and research integrity are maintained.

AI tools must not replace independent human editorial judgment or make final editorial decisions. Editors remain accountable for all editorial decisions and actions.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or identifiable research data to unauthorized AI systems or systems that do not provide adequate confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.

AI systems must not be listed as authors or credited as human contributors to a scholarly publication.

 

REVIEWER’S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

Relevance of Expertise

Reviewers should accept assignments only when they possess appropriate expertise, can evaluate the manuscript objectively, and can complete the review within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers should inform the Editor if they lack the expertise necessary to assess substantial aspects of a manuscript.

 

 

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers' comments should assist the Editor in making informed decisions and provide constructive feedback intended to improve the manuscript.

Assessments should address relevant aspects of scholarly quality, including originality, theoretical contribution, methodological rigor, interpretation of findings, ethical conduct, and relevance to the journal's scope.

 

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shared or discussed with others without the Editor's permission.

Reviewers must not use unpublished data, findings, or ideas obtained through peer review for personal, professional, or academic advantage.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly about a manuscript under review without the Editor's permission.

 

Objectivity and Ethical Standards

Reviews must be conducted objectively, fairly, respectfully, and without personal or discriminatory bias.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and alert the Editor to substantial similarity with other published or submitted work, suspected plagiarism, possible data or image manipulation, or other concerns regarding research integrity.

Requests for additional citations must be based on genuine scholarly relevance. Reviewers must not engage in coercive citation practices or request citations primarily to increase the citation counts of themselves, their associates, or particular journals.

Reviewers must declare potential conflicts of interest and decline assignments when their impartiality could reasonably be compromised.

 

Conflict of Interests

Reviewers must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their assessment. Such interests may include personal relationships, professional collaborations, institutional affiliations, competing research interests, or financial relationships.

The Editor will determine whether the reviewer may proceed or whether an alternative reviewer is required.

 

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, confidential review materials, or identifiable research data to unauthorized generative AI systems or third-party tools that do not provide adequate confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.

JPU prohibits reviewers from delegating the substantive evaluation of manuscripts or the preparation of peer-review reports to generative AI systems. Reviewers remain personally responsible for the accuracy, intellectual integrity, and confidentiality of their assessments.

AI tools must not be credited as authors or contributors to the peer-review process.

 

AUTHORS’ DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 

Reporting Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the work and accountability for the published content. JPU adopts the following four criteria, adapted from the ICMJE recommendations:

1. Substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.
2. Drafting the manuscript or critically reviewing it for important intellectual content.
3. Approving the final version to be published.
4. Agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work and ensuring that questions concerning its accuracy or integrity are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All individuals designated as authors must meet all four criteria, and all contributors who meet the criteria should be given the opportunity to participate in the preparation and approval of the manuscript. Individuals who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately, with their consent.

Gift authorship, ghost authorship, honorary authorship, and other inappropriate attribution of authorship are unacceptable.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors have approved the submission and that no eligible contributor has been inappropriately excluded. The corresponding author must also ensure that relevant declarations and administrative requirements are accurately completed.

For manuscripts derived substantially from a student's thesis, dissertation, or research project, the student should generally be considered for first authorship when their contribution warrants that position. Author order must reflect actual contributions and be agreed upon transparently by the authors.

JPU encourages the use of the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) to describe individual contributions.

 

Changes in Authorship

Changes to authorship or author order after submission will be considered only in exceptional circumstances. Requests must include a written explanation and documented agreement from all affected authors, including any individual being added or removed.

The Editor may request additional documentation before approving a change. Disputes that cannot be resolved through clarification among the authors may be referred to the relevant institution. The journal does not serve as the primary investigator or arbitrator of institutional authorship disputes.

 

Accuracy, Integrity, and Reproducibility

Authors must present accurate, honest, and complete accounts of the research conducted. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate data manipulation, and misleading image manipulation are prohibited.

Methods, analytical procedures, and results must be reported with sufficient detail to permit appropriate evaluation and, where feasible, replication.

Authors must ensure that references are accurate and that cited sources support the claims attributed to them. Fabricated references, misleading attribution, and inappropriate citation practices are unacceptable.

 

Ethical Approval

Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable legal, institutional, and ethical requirements and obtain approval from an appropriate research ethics committee when required.

Authors must report the name of the approving committee and institution, together with the approval number where applicable. Authors must also describe the informed-consent procedures used, including any approved waiver of consent.

Research involving children or other potentially vulnerable populations must include appropriate ethical safeguards and consent or permission procedures.

For research involving deception, secondary data, publicly available information, or identifiable clinical material, authors must explain the relevant ethical considerations and applicable approval or consent arrangements.

 

Data Transparency and Availability

Authors must provide transparent information about the data and materials supporting their findings. JPU encourages authors to include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether the supporting data are available, where they can be accessed, and under what conditions.

Data should be shared through appropriate repositories when ethically and legally permissible. However, data sharing must not compromise participant confidentiality, privacy, informed-consent conditions, intellectual property, or applicable data-protection requirements.

Where data cannot be shared, authors should explain the relevant restrictions. Controlled access or appropriately de-identified data may be considered where suitable safeguards are in place.

Authors may be required to provide supporting data, research instruments, analysis files, or other documentation during review or after publication when reasonably necessary to assess the validity or integrity of the work.

Research data and supporting documentation should be retained for a reasonable period consistent with institutional requirements, applicable regulations, funder policies, ethical obligations, and the nature of the research.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must appropriately cite and acknowledge sources that have contributed to the reported research. Direct quotations, paraphrased material, adapted instruments, figures, tables, and other third-party materials must be attributed accurately, with permissions obtained where required.

Redundant, misleading, or unnecessary citations should be avoided. Authors must not engage in citation manipulation or include references solely to influence citation metrics.

 

Originality of the Work and Publication Practices

Submitted manuscripts must be original and must not be under consideration by another journal at the same time, unless an explicitly approved arrangement applies.

Authors must disclose substantial overlap with previously published work, preprints, theses, conference papers, or related manuscripts so that the Editor can assess whether the submission is appropriate.

Duplicate or redundant publication, plagiarism, and misleading reuse of previously published material are unacceptable. The journal may use similarity-detection software and editorial assessment to screen submissions.

Preprints and other forms of prior dissemination must be disclosed and handled in accordance with the journal's applicable submission and publication policies. Such disclosure does not automatically constitute duplicate publication.

 

Conflict of Interest and Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial competing interests and all sources of funding that supported the research or manuscript preparation.

Funding statements should describe the role of the funder, where applicable, in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and decision to submit the work for publication.

Competing interests may include employment, consultancy, financial relationships, personal relationships, institutional affiliations, or other commitments that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work.

 

Reporting Errors in Published Articles

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the Editor and cooperate in evaluating the issue and issuing an appropriate correction or retraction when warranted.

Authors must cooperate reasonably with requests for clarification or supporting documentation concerning published work.

 

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Manuscript Preparation

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, attribution, and integrity of all submitted content, including content produced with AI assistance.

AI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility or accountability for the work.

Authors must disclose substantive uses of generative AI that contribute to the preparation or content of a manuscript. Disclosures should identify the tool and describe its role. Routine spelling, grammar, or formatting assistance need not be disclosed unless required by the journal's submission instructions.

AI must not be used to fabricate or falsify data, invent references, misrepresent research procedures, generate unsupported results, or manipulate research images in ways that distort the evidence.

Authors must verify AI-generated content and ensure that its use complies with applicable requirements concerning copyright, privacy, confidentiality, and research ethics.

Disclosures should be provided in the designated Use of AI Services section or another appropriate section specified by the journal. When AI is used for data collection, analysis, code, image generation, or other substantive research activities, the use should be described in the Methods or another relevant section.

Failure to disclose substantive AI use, or the use of AI in ways that compromise research integrity, may constitute a breach of publication ethics.

 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

JPU recognizes the growing use of artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies in scholarly communication. Such technologies may support appropriate technical or administrative tasks but do not replace human responsibility, accountability, or independent scholarly judgment.

AI systems cannot meet authorship criteria and must not be listed as authors.

The use of AI must not compromise research integrity, confidentiality, data protection, intellectual property, or the independence of editorial and peer-review processes.

Authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for ensuring that their use of AI complies with the requirements applicable to their respective roles.

The journal reserves the right to request clarification regarding AI use at any stage of review or publication and to take appropriate action when the use of AI raises concerns about accuracy, attribution, confidentiality, or research integrity.

__________________

References:

Committee on Publication Ethics. (n.d.). Core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2023). COPE position statement: Authorship and AI tools. https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2021). COPE discussion document: Artificial intelligence (AI) in decision making. https://doi.org/10.24318/9kvAgrnJ

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2026, January). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

 

 

 

Plagiarism Screening

JPU uses many platforms for plagiarism screening of every accepted submission, including Google and iThenticate Software. 

Corrections and Retractions

In accordance with generally accepted standards of scholarly publishing, JPU does not alter articles after publication. In the case of serious errors or misconduct, however, JPU publishes corrections of serious errors that affect the article, but not fully invalidate the results. The correction note will be published and linked to the published article. The published article will be left as is, with no change.

Retractions is only possible if: 

• there is a clear evidence that the presented findings are invalid and unreliable,
• the article constitutes plagiarism,
• the article has been published elsewhere,
• the article reports unethical research.

The retraction note will be published and will replace the retracted article.