About the Journal

ABOUT UNISTEK

1. About the Journal

UNISTEK (Jurnal Pendidikan dan Aplikasi Teknik) is a scholarly journal dedicated to the publication and dissemination of high-quality research in engineering, technology, and their practical applications.

The journal provides an academic platform for researchers, lecturers, practitioners, and professionals to share original research findings, scientific developments, and innovative solutions addressing contemporary engineering challenges.

UNISTEK welcomes scholarly contributions in the fields of Industrial Engineering, Chemical Engineering, Informatics Engineering, Civil Engineering, Environmental Engineering, and related interdisciplinary areas.

The journal is committed to promoting scientific excellence, academic integrity, editorial independence, and the dissemination of reliable scholarly knowledge through a transparent editorial process and rigorous peer review.

All submitted manuscripts are evaluated based on their originality, scientific quality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, and potential contribution to engineering research and practice.

2. Ownership and Management

UNISTEK is owned and published by the Lembaga Riset dan Pengabdian kepada Masyarakat (LRPM), Universitas Islam Syekh-Yusuf (UNIS), Indonesia.

The journal is managed by an editorial team responsible for overseeing manuscript submissions, editorial screening, peer review, and publication processes.

Editorial decisions are made based on the scientific merit, originality, methodological quality, relevance, and peer-review outcomes of submitted manuscripts.

UNISTEK maintains editorial independence to ensure that publication decisions are guided by academic considerations rather than personal, institutional, or other inappropriate influences.

The journal is committed to transparency, accountability, fairness, and adherence to established publication ethics throughout its editorial and publishing activities.

3. Publication Schedule

UNISTEK is published twice a year (biannually), with two regular publication periods:

  • Issue 1: February–July

  • Issue 2: August–January

The journal publishes scholarly articles covering engineering science, technological innovation, and related interdisciplinary research.

All submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial screening and peer review before a final publication decision is made.

Publication decisions are based on the manuscript's scientific quality, originality, relevance, and compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical standards.

4. Peer Review Process

UNISTEK applies a double-blind peer-review system to ensure fairness, objectivity, confidentiality, and scientific quality in the evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

Under this system, the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

4.1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation conducted by the editorial team.

During this stage, manuscripts are assessed based on:

  • Relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

  • Compliance with the author guidelines and manuscript requirements.

  • Originality and scientific contribution.

  • General methodological and academic quality.

  • Compliance with publication ethics requirements.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic editorial requirements may be rejected during the initial screening stage.

Manuscripts that pass the preliminary assessment are forwarded to qualified independent reviewers for further evaluation.

4.2. Peer Review Evaluation

Reviewers evaluate submitted manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  1. Originality: The novelty and significance of the research findings or scholarly contribution.

  2. Methodological Quality: The appropriateness, clarity, and rigor of the research design, methods, and analysis.

  3. Scientific Quality: The accuracy, reliability, coherence, and overall academic quality of the manuscript.

  4. Relevance: The suitability of the manuscript to the journal's scope and the current development of its research field.

  5. Scholarly Contribution: The potential contribution of the research to scientific knowledge, technological development, or engineering practice.

Reviewers provide constructive evaluations and recommendations to assist the editorial team in determining the suitability of manuscripts for publication.

4.3. Editorial Decisions

Based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editorial assessment, a manuscript may receive one of the following decisions:

  • Accept: The manuscript is accepted for publication.

  • Revision Required: The authors are requested to revise the manuscript in accordance with editorial and reviewer comments.

  • Reject: The manuscript is considered unsuitable for publication in UNISTEK.

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' and editor's comments appropriately.

The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection rests with the editor.

4.4. Confidentiality and Editorial Integrity

All submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications are treated confidentially.

Reviewers and editors are required to maintain professional objectivity and disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise their impartiality.

The review process is conducted in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies and commitment to academic integrity.

5. Plagiarism Policy

UNISTEK is committed to promoting originality, academic integrity, and ethical standards in scholarly publishing.

All submitted manuscripts must represent original scholarly work and appropriately acknowledge the ideas, data, text, and intellectual contributions of others through accurate citations and references.

The journal strictly prohibits plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, and the unauthorized use of another person's intellectual work.

5.1. Similarity Screening

UNISTEK uses Turnitin to screen submitted manuscripts for textual similarity.

The maximum permitted similarity index is 25%.

Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding this threshold may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected by the editorial team.

However, the similarity index is not the sole criterion for determining plagiarism.

The editorial team evaluates similarity reports by considering the nature, extent, and sources of overlapping content, as well as the academic context in which similarities occur.

A manuscript with a similarity index of 25% or below is not automatically considered free from plagiarism.

5.2. Plagiarism Assessment

The editorial team may conduct further assessments when potential plagiarism or inappropriate textual overlap is identified.

Such assessments may include examining the similarity report, reviewing the cited sources, and requesting clarification from the authors.

Editorial decisions are based on the severity and nature of the identified issues.

5.3. Plagiarism Identified After Publication

If plagiarism is suspected or identified after publication, UNISTEK will investigate the matter in accordance with its publication ethics policies.

Depending on the severity of the violation and the outcome of the investigation, the journal may issue a correction, retract the published article, or take other appropriate editorial action.

All suspected cases of plagiarism are handled fairly and in accordance with relevant guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

6. Conflict of Interest Policy

UNISTEK is committed to ensuring transparency, impartiality, objectivity, and integrity throughout the scholarly publication process.

All individuals involved in manuscript preparation, evaluation, and editorial decision-making must disclose any relationships or circumstances that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, their professional judgment.

Potential conflicts of interest may include financial, professional, personal, or institutional relationships.

6.1. Authors' Responsibilities

Authors are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest when submitting their manuscripts.

Such disclosures should identify relationships or circumstances that may affect the interpretation, presentation, or credibility of the reported research.

6.2. Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise their ability to provide an independent and objective evaluation.

Reviewers should withdraw from the review process when their impartiality may be affected by financial, professional, personal, or institutional relationships.

6.3. Editors' Responsibilities

Editors must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and withdraw from editorial assessments or decision-making processes when their impartiality may be compromised.

Editorial decisions must be based on the scientific quality, originality, relevance, and ethical compliance of manuscripts.

6.4. Management of Conflicts of Interest

All disclosed conflicts of interest are evaluated by the editorial team.

Appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that the editorial and peer-review processes remain fair, transparent, and unbiased.

If a potential conflict of interest is identified after publication, UNISTEK will assess the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

7. Allegations of Research Misconduct

UNISTEK is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, academic responsibility, and ethical scholarly publishing.

The journal takes all allegations of research misconduct seriously and is committed to addressing such concerns through fair, confidential, and evidence-based editorial procedures.

7.1. Types of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

  • Plagiarism: Using another person's ideas, words, data, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.

  • Data Fabrication: Creating or reporting research data or results that were not actually obtained.

  • Data Falsification: Manipulating research materials, methods, data, or results in a manner that misrepresents the research findings.

  • Duplicate Publication: Publishing substantially the same research in more than one publication without appropriate disclosure or justification.

  • Inappropriate Authorship: Including individuals who do not meet authorship criteria, excluding legitimate contributors, or misrepresenting authorship contributions.

Other actions that compromise the reliability, transparency, or integrity of scholarly research may also be subject to editorial investigation.

7.2. Handling Allegations

When an allegation of research misconduct is received, the editorial team will conduct an appropriate preliminary assessment.

The evaluation may involve:

  1. Examining the nature and credibility of the allegation.

  2. Reviewing available evidence and relevant manuscript or publication records.

  3. Requesting explanations or supporting information from the parties involved, when necessary.

  4. Consulting independent experts or relevant affiliated institutions, where appropriate.

  5. Determining suitable editorial actions based on the available evidence and the findings of the assessment.

All allegations are handled fairly and confidentially, with due consideration for the rights and responsibilities of the parties involved.

7.3. Editorial Actions

If research misconduct is confirmed, UNISTEK may take appropriate actions depending on the nature and severity of the violation.

Such actions may include:

  • Rejecting a manuscript under editorial consideration.

  • Issuing a correction to a published article.

  • Retracting a published article.

  • Taking other appropriate actions consistent with the journal's publication ethics policies.

Editorial decisions regarding research misconduct are made in accordance with recognized scholarly publishing standards, including relevant guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

UNISTEK is committed to maintaining the reliability of the scholarly record while ensuring transparency, fairness, and accountability in the handling of research misconduct.