Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Indonesian Journal of Chemistry is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, as well as short communication in all areas of basic and applied chemistry.

Indonesian Journal of Chemistry covers the following topics.


 Organic Chemistry
 Physical and Theoretical Chemistry
 Inorganic Chemistry
 Analytical Chemistry
 Materials Chemistry
 Polymer Chemistry
 Supramolecular Chemistry
 Organometallic Chemistry
 Coordination Chemistry
 Biomolecular Chemistry
 Natural Products and Medicinal Chemistry
 Electrochemistry
 Environmental Chemistry

The submitted manuscript should have relevance with basic and applied chemistry. Papers dealing with environmental sciences, technological applications, or natural product-derived compounds without any significance to the basic understanding of molecules or materials are not acceptable. Routine synthesis of molecules or materials without presenting significant new synthetic routes, structural parameters, and/or potential applications are not welcomed in this journal. Note that we no longer accept Chemical Engineering and Chemical Education papers.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Communication

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Educational Chemistry

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Note

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

ISGET 2019

Editors
  • Harumi Veny
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

RCChE 2018

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Student Paper

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

ICCS 2019

Editors
  • Indriana Kartini
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

i-TREC 2019

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

ICICS 2019

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Joint Conference on Chemistry

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

ISNPINSA 2019

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

ICSTSI 2020

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

A manuscript submitted is evaluated through Initial Review by Editorial Board. If the article matchs the journal requirements in term of the scope, originality, novelty sufficiency of experimental data and format, at least 2 (two) peer reviewers are assigned to review the manuscript with Blind Review Process. Two weeks are alocation time given to peer revewer to evaluate the manuscipt. After review process is finished, the assigned editor makes decision for the article. If the article needs revision, the manuscript is  returned to the authors to revise. These processes take a month (maximum time). If the decision is major revision or resubmission, revised manuscript that has been resubmitted by submitter is sent back to the previous peer reviwers for re-evaluation. After that, the editor makes final decision (accepted or rejected). In the each manuscript reviewed, peer reviewers will be rated based on the substantial and technical aspects. Assigment of peer reviewer is based on the expertise and experiences in research and publication relevant to the field of manuscript to be reviewed. Number of citation and h-index value of peer reviewers are parameter examples for consideration in assigning as reviewer.

 

Publication Frequency

Since 2020 (Volume 20) Indonesian Journal of Chemistry publish six issues (numbers) annually (February, April, June, August, October and December).

 

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.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with Budapest Open Access Initiative

 

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...

 

Publication Ethics

This part contains statement to clarify ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Publication Ethics.

I. INTRODUCTION

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed 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 of society-owned or sponsored journals.

An important role of the publisher is support the extensive efforts of journal editors and the often unsung volunteer work undertaken by peer reviewers in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. It is a tribute to scholarly practice that the system works well and problems are comparatively rare. The publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process and is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practices are followed.

Indones. J. Chem. takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record very seriously. Our journal programs record "the minutes of science" and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those "minutes" in all our policies, including the guidelines we have adopted to support editors, reviewers, and authors in performing their ethical duties. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Indones. J. Chem. will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors. Finally, we are working closely with other publishers and industry associations to set standards for best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions--and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

II. DUTIES OF EDITORS

II.1. Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

II.2. Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

II.3. 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.

II.4. 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.
  • Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
  • Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
  • Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
  • It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.
  • Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

II.5. Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

III. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

III.1. 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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Indones. J. Chem. shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

III.2. 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.

III.3. 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.

III.4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

III.5. Acknowledgement of Sources

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.

III.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. 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.

IV. DUTIES OF AUTHORS

IV.1. 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. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

IV.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be 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.

IV.3. 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. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

IV.4. 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. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

IV.5. Acknowledgement 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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

IV.6. 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.

IV.7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

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. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

IV.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

IV.9. Fundamental errors in published works

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. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

 

Plagiarism Policy

Indonesian Journal of Chemistry state that plagiarism is not acceptable for all author and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified by plagiarism cheker software in an article that is submitted for publication. We are using Turnitin  as the plagiarism checker software.

 “Plagiarism is copying another person’s text or ideas and passing the copied material as your own work. You must both delineate (i.e., separate and identify) the copied text from your text and give credit to (i.e., cite the source) the source of the copied text to avoid accusations of plagiarism.  Plagiarism is considered fraud and has potentially harsh consequences including loss of job, loss of reputation, and the assignation of reduced or failing grade in a course."

This definition of plagiarism applies for copied text and ideas:
  1. Regardless of the source of the copied text or idea.
  2. Regardless of whether the author(s) of the text or idea which you have copied actually copied that  text or idea from another source.
  3. Regardless of whether or not the authorship of the text or idea which you copy is known
  4. Regardless of the nature of your text (journal paper/article, web page, book chapter, paper submitted for a college course, etc) into which you copy the text or idea
  5. Regardless of whether or not the author of the source of the copied material gives permission for the material to be copied; and
  6. Regardless of whether you are or are not the author of the source of the copied text or idea (self-plagiarism).
 
When plagiarism is identified by the Plagiarism Checker  software,  the Editorial Board responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the article in agreement with the following guidelines:
 
Minor Plagiarism
A small sentence or short paragraph of another manuscript is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other papers or publications.
Punishment: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the manuscript and properly cite the original sources.
 
Intermediate Plagiarism
A significant data, paragraph, or sentence of an article is plagiarized without proper citation to the original source.
Punishment: The submitted article is automatic rejected.
 
Severe Plagiarism
A large portion of an article is plagiarized that involves many aspects such as reproducing original results (data, formulation, equation, law, statement, etc.), ideas, and methods presented in other publications.
Punishment: The paper is automatic rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles to the journal.
 
Retraction

The articles published in Indonesian Journal of Chemistry will be considered to retract in the publication if:

  1. they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

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

 

Digital Archiving

This journal utilizes the Indonesia One Search (IOS)Indonesian Scientific Journal Database (ISJD), 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.

 

Statistic Download Article

Statistic download using ALM Plugin, statistic will show on every article page.

 ex. https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/ijc/article/view/21187

 

Review Guidelines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

  1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is the good reason.
  2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
  3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
  4. Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
  5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.

 Full Review Process of Manuscript

  1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organisation?
  2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
  3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
  4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
  5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
  6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
  7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.