Other's
Peer Review Process
Every article submitted to the editor will be received first by the staff editor then selected the selection editor for the next stage. the next stage through the Initial Review process by the selection Editor. The selection editor will continue the article to the reviewer stage and sent it to the editorial board and the executive editor will follow the next selection of the Review Process stage. After that, the article of the review process will be sent to the selection editor to be received or returned to the author for revision. This process takes a month for a maximum time. In each manuscript, the editorial board and peer reviewers will be assessed from substantial and technical aspects.
All submitted manuscripts are read by editorial staff. the manuscript evaluated by the editor becomes incompatible with journal criteria rejected immediately without any external reviews. The manuscript evaluated to be a potential interest for our readers is sent to two reviewer desks. The editor then makes a final decision based on reviewers' recommendations of several possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted. The editor has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.
Review Process:
- The author submits the script
- Editor's Evaluation (some manuscripts denied or returned before the review process)
- Double-blind peer review process
- Editor's Decision
- Confirm to an author
Publication Ethics
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for JPPRD.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
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.
Competing Interest Guidelines
In the interests of transparency and to help readers form their own judgements of potential bias, Caraka Tani journals' require reviewers (in the process of peer review) and authors (in the Author Declaration) to declare any competing financial and/or non-financial interests in relation to the work described. The corresponding author is responsible for submitting a competing interests' statement on behalf of all authors of the paper.
Definition
For the purposes of this policy, competing interests are defined as financial and non-financial interests that could directly undermine, or be perceived to undermine the objectivity, integrity and value of a publication, through a potential influence on the judgements and actions of authors with regard to objective data presentation, analysis and interpretation.
Financial competing interests
Financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):
- Receiving reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of the article, either now or in the future.
- Holding stocks or shares in an organization that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of the article, either now or in the future.
- Holding, or currently applying for, patents relating to the content of the manuscript.
- Receiving reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript.
Non-financial competing interests
Non-financial competing interests include (but are not limited to) political, personal, religious, ideological, academic, and intellectual competing interests.
Example competing interest statements:
I/We have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Author Fees
This journal charges the following author fees:
Article Submission & Publication Fee: 0.00 (IDR)