Editorial Policies

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

An editor first reviews the submitted manuscript. It will be evaluated in the office whether it is suitable for the Fenomen focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similarity score by using iThenticate.

The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Double-Blind Peer Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.

The suggested decision will be evaluated in an editorial board meeting. Afterward, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author.

 

Publication Frequency

This journal is published 2 times a year (March & September).

 

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.

 

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 and Malpractice Statement

Section A: Publication and authorship 

  1. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular article.
  2. The review process is a blind peer review.
  3. The factors that are taken into account in the review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised bid will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 
  4. Authors must participate in the peer-review process. 
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review 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. 

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of the research’s funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably sure.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

 

Retraction

The papers published in the Fenomen will be considered retracted 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 follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

 

CrossMark policy

CrossMark 

CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref to provide a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content.

By applying the Crossmark logo, Fenomen is committing to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur. 

Clicking on the Crossmark logo on a document will tell you the current status of a text and may also give you additional publication record information about the report.

For more information on CrossMark, please visit the CrossMark site.

The Fenomen content that will have the CrossMark logo is restricted to current and future journal content and is limited to specific publication types. Articles in Press will not have the CrossMark icon for the present.

For general author guidelines and information, please see: 

https://journal.isi.ac.id/index.php/fenomen/index

Correction and Retraction Policies

The Fenomen is committed to upholding the integrity of the literature and publishes Errata, Expressions of Concerns or Retraction Notices dependent on the situation and by the COPE Retraction Guidelines. More information about the publication of ethics International Journal of Visual and Performing Arts can be found on Publication Ethics, and Malpractice Statement and information about COPE retraction guidelines can be accessed at Retraction page.

 

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to the Fenomen will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Fenomen will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool by a member of the editorial team. The papers presented to the Fenomen must have a similarity level of less than 20 %.

Plagiarism exposes another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. To accurately judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

  • An author can copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the source. This practice can be identified by comparing the source and the manuscript/work suspected of plagiarism.
  • Substantial copying implies that an author can reproduce a significant part of another author without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The actual term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, being often used in intellectual property. Condition refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.
  • Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words, or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more severe form to be identified.