Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal issues range from those consisting of a selection of essays about open topics to special volumes edited by guests on a particular theme. Manuscripts in the forms of research papers or theoretical papers that appropriately address the idea of Product Design, Interior Design and Architecture. Subjects covered include writing about individual designers, theoretical texts, design theory, culture & vernacular, sustainability, technology, pedagogy, visual culture, and architecture.

All material submitted to IDEALOG is subject to rigorous peer reviews using the 'double-blind' referee process. The Editorial Board, which was enhanced by regional editors in around several countries, welcomes contributions from all over the world. This is the express purpose of the IDEALOG to influence the future of design and its acceptance nationally and internationally by publishing innovative contributions to every aspect of Product Design, Interior Design & Architecture.

Peer Review Process

All papers are fully peer-reviewed. We only publish articles that have been reviewed and approved by highly qualified researchers with expertise in a field appropriate for the article. We used Double Blind Peer Review Process. Detailed information about the flow for the manuscript submission (author) to the acceptance by editor is shown in the following steps :

1. Manuscript Submission (by author).
2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors). Editors have a right to directly accept, reject, or review. Prior to further processing steps, plagiarism check using iThenticate is applied for each manuscript.
3. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers Double Blind Peer Review).
4. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers comments).
5. Paper Revision (by author).
6. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with similar flow to point number 1. 
7. If reviewer seems to be satisfied with revision, notification for acceptance (by editor). 
8. Galley proof and publishing process  

The steps point number 1 to 5 is considered as 1 round of peer-reviewing process. Our reviewing process at least goes through 2 round of reviewing process.

The journal editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions :

1. accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper in its original form.
2. accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections.
3. accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance ): the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors.
4. revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes.
5. reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions

Open Access Policy

IDEALOG  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. IDEALOG will not charge subscription or access fees. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all articles in IDEALOG without any commercial intention.

Benefits of open access for authors, include: 

1. Free access for all users worldwide;
2. Authors retain copyright to their work;
3. Increased visibility and readership;
4. Rapid publication;
5. No spatial constraints.

IDEALOG also operates under the Creative Commons Licence (CC-BY-SA 4.0). This allows for the reproduction of articles, free of charge, for non-commercial use only and with the appropriate citation information. All authors publishing with the IDEALOG accept these as the terms of publication.

Idealog does not charge for Article Processing Charges (APCs) or submission fees, publication fees or page charges.

Archiving Policy

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS and CLOCKSS 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. All content in the CLOCKSS Archive and the Global LOCKSS Network is preserved with explicit publisher permission, secured via written contract or through online permission statements. We work closely with LOCKSS network implementers to facilitate development of governance and legal terms that are appropriate to the implicated content, jurisdictions, rights, and access affordances. Our work also licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

It is necessary to agree upon common standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher.

1. Author provides a letter of statement stating that the article submitted is an original script from opus or research result that has never been submitted in any journal or other publishing whether online or printed, that the script does not contain any indication of plagiarism, and include references, quotations, and citation correctly in accordance with the rules of scientific paper.
2. Author is oblige to follow the provided writing instruction. The writing instruction can be downloaded in Idealog website for every submitted script. The writing instruction covers method of content presentation and writing standards.
3. Every script received will go through two review steps. First review by editorial board member to check indication of plagiarism through iThenticate. Second review is bind peer review to check content quality by external reviewer in accordance with the competence and content of script. Any script having plagiarism indication or possesing content similarity over 15% will be returned to author for revision, while script possessing plagiarism indication over 50% will be returned and unpublished (rejected).
4. Authors of 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.
5. Authors are 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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
6. An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
7. 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.
8. 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. 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.
9. 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.
10.  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.
11.  Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
12. 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 plagiarism indicated.

Retraction Policy

Jurnal Rekayasa Sistem & Industri (JRSI) is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Retractions are issued in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to correct the academic record when significant ethical violations, errors, or misconduct are identified in published articles.

1. Grounds for Retraction

An article may be retracted under the following circumstances:

• Plagiarism: If the article contains significant portions copied from other works without proper citation.
• Data fabrication or falsification: If the research findings are based on manipulated, fabricated, or falsified data.
• Duplicate publication: If the same article has been published in another journal without proper justification or approval.
• Ethical breaches: If the article violates ethical research standards, including human or animal research ethics.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest: If serious undisclosed conflicts of interest are found that compromise the credibility of the research.
• Major errors affecting validity: If errors in data analysis, methodology, or results significantly alter the study’s conclusions.

2. Retraction Process

• The editorial board initiates an investigation upon receiving allegations of misconduct or errors.
• Authors are given an opportunity to respond to concerns before a final decision is made.
• If retraction is justified, the journal will:
• Publish a formal retraction notice, clearly stating the reason for the retraction.
• Mark the article as retracted, while keeping the original version available for transparency.
• Update indexing databases to reflect the retraction.

3. Retraction Notice

A retraction notice will be published in the journal and linked to the original article. It will include:

• The reason for retraction (e.g., plagiarism, ethical violations, or errors).
• A statement clarifying whether the authors agreed to the retraction.
• Information on any related editorial actions.

4. Partial Retractions and Corrections

• If only part of an article is affected by errors, a correction or erratum may be issued instead of a full retraction.
• The correction will be clearly linked to the original article to ensure transparency.

5. Consequences of Retraction

• Retracted articles remain available but are clearly labeled to prevent further citation of unreliable work.
• Authors responsible for misconduct may be banned from future submissions.
• Severe cases of ethical violations may be reported to affiliated institutions or funding agencies.

By enforcing a strict retraction policy, Jurnal Rekayasa Sistem & Industri (JRSI) upholds the highest standards of research integrity and academic credibility.

Policy of Screening for 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. Authors must fill in a plagiarism free statement when a scientific article is submitted.

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. IDEALOG  will actively check for plagiarism with the support of iThenticate software

The editors will run plagiarism check using iThenticate for the submitted manuscripts before sending to the reviewers. We do not process any plagiarised contents. If a manuscript has similarity index over 15%, we will send back the manuscript to the author to be revised for the plagiarised contents. If a manuscript has similarity index over 50% of plagiarism based on the result of Plagiarism Checker, manuscript will be rejected. 

The editor is not responsible for all contents of the written material. All of these papers have gone through plagiarism and grammar control based on a iThenticate, pro plagiarism and grammar checker. The Author can find the program online at www.smallseotools.com.

Withdrawal Policy

Jurnal Rekayasa Sistem & Industri (JRSI) is committed to maintaining the integrity of the publication process. Authors are discouraged from withdrawing manuscripts once they have been submitted, as this affects the efficiency of editorial and peer review processes. However, withdrawals may be permitted under specific conditions as outlined below:

1. Withdrawal Before Review Process

• Authors may withdraw their manuscript before it enters the peer review process by submitting a written request to the editorial office.
• The request must be formally submitted by the corresponding author, stating the reason for withdrawal.

2. Withdrawal During or After Peer Review

• Once a manuscript is under review, withdrawal is strongly discouraged.
• If authors wish to withdraw, they must provide a valid reason, and approval is subject to the editorial board's discretion.
• Frequent or unethical withdrawals may result in blacklisting of the author(s) from future submissions.

3. Withdrawal After Acceptance

• Post-acceptance withdrawal is not permitted except in extraordinary circumstances (e.g., ethical concerns, critical errors).
• If the withdrawal request is due to ethical violations or research misconduct, the journal reserves the right to issue a retraction and notify relevant authorities.

4. Unauthorized Withdrawal & Consequences

• If an author withdraws a manuscript unilaterally without notifying the editorial board, they may be barred from submitting future manuscripts for a certain period.
• Institutions or funding agencies may be notified if misconduct is suspected.

5. Editorial Withdrawal Rights

• The journal reserves the right to withdraw a submission if ethical issues, plagiarism, or data falsification are discovered at any stage.
• A retraction notice will be issued for already published articles found to violate academic integrity.

This policy ensures fairness to all contributors and maintains the efficiency and integrity of the publication process.