Publication Ethics

The decision of which articles should be published fully depends on the editorial board’s decision. It is based on requirements (originality, novelty, sociological perspective, and sociological references) that are required for all articles in Masyarakat: Jurnal Sosiologi. The editors may confer with one another or with reviewers in making their decisions. 


  1. Authors should adhere to publication requirements and author guidelines.
  2. Authors must ensure that the manuscript is original - free of plagiarism.
  3. Authors should present their manuscripts clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation.
  4. The manuscript has not been published elsewhere and the author does not submit to other journals during the review process.
  5. Authors should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
  6. The research work in order to write the manuscript should be conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
  7. Authors should take responsibility for submitted and published work.
  8. The authorship of a manuscript should accurately reflect individual contributions to the work and its reporting.
  9. Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

Peer Reviewers:

  1. Peer reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
  2. Peer reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  3. Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of data and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the peer-review process, beyond those released by the journal.
  4. Peer reviewers should not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
  5. Peer reviewers should declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.
  6. Peer reviewers should not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.
  7. Peer reviewers must be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.
  8. Peer reviewers should acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing, and in a timely manner.
  9. Peer reviewers should provide personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.
  10. Peer reviewers should recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.


  1. Each editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so.
  2. Editors can accept, decline/reject, resubmit for review, or request revision of the manuscript based on requirements before handing it over to peer reviewers.
  3. Editors will then forward the manuscript to a blind peer-review process and the reviewers will make recommendations to accept, reject, or modify the manuscript.
  4. Editors must ensure that each manuscript is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
  5. Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
  6. Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without written consent of the author.