All articles submitted to the Journal of Business Administration Science will be reviewed by double-blind peer-reviewers to select dedicated and knowledgeable individuals who are experts in their field. Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Business Administration Science will be evaluated through the Editorial and Peer-Review stages. At the Editorial Review stage, the manuscript will be evaluated for its suitability with the focus and scope of the journal as well as the author's guidelines. Turnitin is used for plagiarism checks at this stage. The duration of the evaluation is 1-4 weeks. Manuscripts that pass the Editorial Review stage will enter the Peer-Review stage where the substance of the manuscript will be double-blind reviewed by a reviewer. The duration of the evaluation is 1-12 weeks after the review assignment. Reviewers can request resubmission for review after the author has revised the article. The editor will send the reviewer's comments to the author to take the necessary action and revise. Based on the reviewer's recommendation and an assessment of the revision by the author, the Editor decides whether the revised manuscript can be published or not. All pre-published articles must be free of plagiarism content. Editors use Turnitin to check articles for parity with other articles.
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.
Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis, e-ISSN 2746-1297, is a peer-reviewed journal published by Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Diponegoro. 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. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis 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.
Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Diponegoro as publisher of Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis 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 Faculty of Social and Political Sciences Universitas Diponegoro and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editor of the Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
An author could in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
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 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.
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
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.
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.
Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis to maintain the published content published and alert readers to changes if and when they occur.
What is Crossmark?
CrossMark, a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a document. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. Clicking on the CrossMark icon will inform the reader of the document's current status and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.
Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Bisnis (JIAB), e-ISSN 2746-1297, Journal of Business Administration Science (JIAB), e-ISSN 2746-1297, is published quarterly or four times a year in: