About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The JGSM acts as a publication media of high quality scientific investigations resulted from various geological scientific issues.

Published articles  covers Geo-sciences, Geo-resources, Geo-hazards, and Geo-environments. Geo-sciences are basic earth sciences in  geology, geophysics, and geochemistry. Geo-resources are applied earth sciences scoping in geological resources. Geo-hazards are applied earth sciences concerning in geological hazards. Geo-environments are applied earth sciences focusing in environmental geology.

 

Peer Review Process

Some policies in the review of Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi):

  1. Any submitted paper will be reviewed by reviewers.
  2. Review process employs Double-blind Review, that the reviewer does not know the identity of the author, and the author does not know the identity of the reviewer.
  3. In the review process, reviewers consider the correspondence of title, abstract, discussion (findings) and conclusions. In addition, reviewers also consider the novelty, scientific impact and references used in the paper.

The response of the reviewers will be the basis for the Editor to conclude:

  1. Accept Submission
  2. Revisions Required
  3. Resubmit for review
  4. Resubmit elsewhere
  5. Decline Submission

An article was rejected for publication due to various considerations, including:

  1. The article does not fit the scope of journal.
  2. The article does not follow the rules of writing scientific papers or author guidelines.
  3. The fundamental methodological errors.
  4. The author refuses to make suggestions of improvements provided by the reviewer without a logical basis.
  5. There are indications of plagiarism of more than 20%.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making investigation freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi) uses CC-BY-NC or The Creative Commons Attribution–ShareAlike License
This means :

  • Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  • NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

Publication Ethics

Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi) is a journal intentions to be a managing peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. It is published original investigation papers, review articles and case studies focused on geo-science, geo-resources, geo-hazards, geo-environments as well as related topics that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Pusat Survei Geologi, Badan Geologi, Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral). This statement refers to COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Allegation of Investigation Misconduct

Investigation Misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing investigation and writing an article by authors, or in reporting investigation results. As authors are found to have been involved with investigation misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in other scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to guarantee the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In situations of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The initial step involves verifying the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of investigation misconduct. This primary step also includes determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial survey irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For instances in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article is satisfactory.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Eventually, authors, journals, and institutions have an important compulsion to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi) will resume to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific document.

 

Complaints and Appeals

Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi) will have a clear process for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to the respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints include anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline.

 

Ethical Oversight

If the research work encompasses chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to follow ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

 

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should submit an accurate account of the original investigation performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Investigator should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Intentionally or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must guarantee that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other writter and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The main literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal contemporarily. Additionally, it is expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same investigation in more than one journal. Offering the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the investigation and cite publications that have been influential in establishing the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be furnished.
  5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of investigation publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, idea, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In occasions where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the  publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly 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.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author encounters a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should quickly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper.
  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

 

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: On the basis of the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance  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 deliberate with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. All editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: The editor must confirm that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. The editor should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient knowledge and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without consider to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An essential part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is reserved confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed approval for the actual research presented, subscribe for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own work without written permission of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Material regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be saved confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the article. 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. The reviewers should inform the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are sensitive of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concomitant submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the article or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal requests for further information or advice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

Plagiarism Checker

Every submitted paper to Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi) will go through plagiarism checking by Turnitin in initial process of paper screening and before publishing it in an issue

References Management

In writing Citation and Bibliography, editor Jurnal Geologi dan Sumberdaya Mineral (JGSM.Geologi)  suggests authors to use the Mendeley Reference Management Software.