Policies

Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat (JPU): Indonesian Journal of Indigenous Psychology is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that serves as a forum for facilitating communication, dissemination, and the advancement of ideas among scholars in psychology and the social sciences. The journal showcases high quality work that recognizes the relevance of indigenous perspectives.

JPU is a scholarly outlet for publishing high quality research by social scientists from around the world whose studies address a broad range of psychological topics within the Indonesian context (typically employing Indonesian samples). Manuscript submitted to JPU must emphasize indigenous insights that reflect sociocultural values within the Indonesian context, particularly in discussing the implications of the study.

JPU welcomes a wide range of empirical research in psychology, with particular interest in manuscripts that highlight cultural and cross-cultural aspects. This includes comparative studies, the development of emerging theories or hyptotheses grounded in non-Western contexts, and the application or critical examination of psychological principles and theories within specific cultural settings.

JPU accepts manuscripts in the following subthemes:

  1. Cultural Psychology,
  2. Social Psychology,
  3. Interpersonal Relationships,
  4. Individual and Group Dynamics in Organizational/Community Settings,
  5. Developmental Psychology,
  6. Development of Psychological Instruments,
  7. Educational Psychology,
  8. Clinical Psychology,
  9. Political Psychology.

To promote more rapid and diverse approaches of knowledge dissemination, JPU accepts four types of manuscripts: original research articles, literature reviews, brief reports, and commentary papers. 

All published manuscripts are registered with DOI.

 

Section Policies

Original Research

Original research manuscript reports finding of empirical studies (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods designs). We welcome empirical study reports that have significant contributions towards the understanding of particular phenomena, regardless whether the results is/is not supporting the hypothesis, as long as the methods are appropriate and robust and the study is discussed within the indigenous perspective. We also accept report of replicable studies. The maximum length for this manuscript is 6,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 200 words for each language), main text, references, tables, and figures.

 

Literature Review

This type of manuscript focuses on critical analysis of a particular topic, in either a narrative or systematic review. Literature review manuscript must address an important study gap. The manuscript must include method section, which details the process of choosing studies for analysis (the databases use, study criteria, etc.). Meta-analysis is encouraged in the systematic review manuscript. The maximum length for a literature review manuscript is 6,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 200 words for each language), main text, references, tables, and figures.

Brief Report

Brief report papers report a pilot or ongoing empirical study. This type of manuscript allows a rapid dissemination of findings of cutting-edge topics that are parts of the ongoing project. The maximum length for a brief report manuscript is 3,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 100 words for each language), main text, tables, figures, and a maximum of 8 references.

Commentary Paper

A critical opinion or comment of contemporary topics or phenomena to increase scholars’ awareness and to encourage future studies. A commentary paper should identify an important yet understudied areas and is expressed in a critical and scientific style. The maximum length for a commentary paper is 3,000 words, including bi-lingual abstract (of maximum 100 words for each language), main text, tables, figures, and a maximum of 8 references.

Editorial Note

This is a commentary note typically shared by the Editor or invited authors and are usually reviewed by the editors.

 

Peer Review Process

To enhance the efficiency of the peer-review process, all submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening. This screening assesses the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope and its compliance with the author guideline. Based on this evaluation, the editor determines whether the manuscript is suitable to proceed to peer review. If necessary, the editor may provide preliminary revision recommendations before sending the manuscript out for review. The initial screening process is typically completed within one week.

Manuscripts deemed suitable for review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer-review process. After considering the reviewers’ comments and recommendations, the editor will issue an editorial decision. There are four possible decisions:

• ACCEPT (as is),

• MINOR REVISION (without an additional round of review),

• MAJOR REVISION (requiring an additional round of review of the revised manuscript),

• REJECT.

The journal aims to provide an editorial decision within three months of submission; however, this timeline may vary depending on the availability and responsiveness of the assigned reviewers.

The copyediting process will begin upon formal acceptance of the manuscript and only after the author(s) have submitted a signed publication consent form, which will be provided along with the acceptance notification from the editor.

 

Publication Frequency

JPU has a regular publication schedule on every June and December.

 

Open Access Policy

 

JPU provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public and to support 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...

 

Indexing

 

Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat (JPU) is currently indexed in:

 

Publication Ethics

The printable version of Publication Ethics could be downloaded here.

Jurnal Psikologi Ulayat (JPU) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity, transparency, and ethical publishing. The journal follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and Guidelines (latest version), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations, and internationally recognized frameworks governing responsible research conduct and scholarly publication.

All parties involved in the publication process—including Editors, Reviewers, Authors, and the Publisher—are required to adhere strictly to these ethical standards to ensure the integrity of the academic record.

 

EDITOR’S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

General Duties and Responsibilities

The Editor is accountable for everything published in the journal and is responsible for safeguarding the integrity of the academic record. The Editor shall strive to meet the needs of readers and authors, continuously improve the journal, ensure academic freedom and freedom of expression, and prevent commercial or institutional interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. 

Editorial decisions shall be made independently of the publisher, sponsoring institutions, or commercial interests.

The Editor must maintain neutrality, objectivity, and independence when handling submissions, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, citizenship, political ideology, or institutional affiliation.

Editorial Decisions

The Editor is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are eligible for publication based solely on their scientific merit, originality, clarity, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by personal bias, conflicts of interest, or external pressure.

The Editor should not reverse a decision to accept a manuscript unless serious ethical concerns, methodological errors, or evidence of misconduct are identified.

In cases of suspected research misconduct (e.g., fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, data manipulation), the Editor will follow COPE flowcharts and guidelines.

Confidentiality

The Editor and editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information about a manuscript must not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher as appropriate. 

Manuscripts sent for peer review must remain anonymized under a double-blind review process. 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the Editor’s own research without explicit written consent from the authors.

Peer Review

The Editor must ensure that all submissions undergo a fair, unbiased, and timely double-blind peer-review process. Reviewers shall be selected based on relevant expertise and absence of conflicts of interest.

The Editor shall take reasonable steps to ensure diversity, equity, and inclusion in reviewer selection.

Quality Assurance

The Editor shall take all reasonable measures to ensure the quality, ethical integrity, and transparency of the published content. The Editor may request raw data, ethical approval documentation, or additional clarification during the review process when necessary.

Submissions by the Editor

Editors may submit their own work to the journal; however, such submissions must undergo the same review process as other manuscripts and must be handled independently by another Editor without access to the review process.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The Editor shall take appropriate action when significant errors, ethical breaches, or misconduct are identified in published articles. This may include issuing a correction (erratum), retraction, or expression of concern, in accordance with COPE guidelines. 

Retractions shall remain permanently linked to the original article to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Conflict of Interests

Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have any financial, professional, or personal conflict of interest. 

Use of Artificial Intelligence

Editors may use artificial intelligence (AI) tools solely for administrative or technical assistance (e.g., language clarity checks or plagiarism screening support). However, AI tools must not replace independent editorial judgment or decision-making. Editorial decisions must always be made by a human editor.

Editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or identifiable data into AI systems that store, reuse, or learn from submitted content without explicit consent and appropriate data protection safeguards.

AI tools must not be listed as authors or credited as contributors in any publication.

 

REVIEWER’S DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Relevance of the Expertise

Reviewers should accept assignments only if they possess appropriate expertise and can complete the review objectively and within the agreed timeframe.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers’ comments should assist the Editor in decision-making and provide constructive feedback to authors aimed at improving the manuscript.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shared or discussed with others without the Editor’s permission. 

Reviewers must not use unpublished data or ideas from the manuscript for personal research or advantage.

Objectivity and Ethical Standards

Reviews must be conducted objectively, fairly, and free from personal bias.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited and alert the Editor to substantial similarity with other published or submitted work.

Conflict of Interests

Reviewers must decline invitations if they have any conflict of interest related to the authors, institutions, or research funding.

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review

Reviewers must not use generative AI tools or large language models to evaluate, summarize, analyze, or generate review comments for submitted manuscripts.

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Uploading manuscript content into AI systems constitutes a breach of confidentiality and is strictly prohibited.

Peer review must be conducted independently by the invited reviewer. The reviewer remains fully responsible for the intellectual content, integrity, and confidentiality of the review.

AI tools must not be credited or acknowledged as contributors to the peer-review process.

 

AUTHORS’ DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Reporting Authorship

Authors should declare all contributing persons that meet criteria as Authors. The persons listed as contributing authors must have significant contribution in: 1). the process of collecting or interpreting data, 2). the preparation and writing of the manuscript, and 3). the accuracy and integrity of the scientific writing of the manuscript. For further criteria of authorship, see Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (Standard 8.12). In particular, manuscript that was produced based on the student’s work should list the name of the student as the first author, except under exceptional circumstances.

The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors and no uninvolved persons are included in the author list. The corresponding author is responsible to make sure that all co-authors have agreed to the submission for publication.

The journal encourages the use of the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) system to specify author contributions.

All authors must agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work and ensure its accuracy and integrity.

Changes in Authorship

Changes to authorship after submission are generally not permitted except under exceptional circumstances and must be approved by the Editor with written consent from all authors. 

Accuracy, Integrity, and Reproducibility

Authors must present accurate, honest, and complete accounts of the research performed. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate data manipulation, and image manipulation constitute research misconduct and are strictly prohibited.

The manuscript must contain sufficient methodological detail to allow replication. 

Ethical Approval

Research involving human participants or animals must obtain prior ethical approval from a legally recognized ethics committee. Authors must report approval details and confirm that informed consent was obtained. Please see Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (Section 8) for further consideration in reporting studies that involve human participation.

Data Transparency

Authors may be required to provide raw data during review. Authors are encouraged to deposit data in publicly accessible repositories where ethically and legally permissible. Data should be retained for at least ten years after publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must only submit entirely original works. Works of others that contribute to the study reported in the manuscript must be appropriately cited and acknowledged. Redundant or unnecessary citations must be avoided.

Originality of the Work

Manuscripts must be original and not under consideration elsewhere. The journal may use plagiarism detection software to screen submissions.

Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest and all sources of funding.

Reporting Errors in Published Articles

If authors discover significant errors in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal and cooperate in issuing corrections or retractions.

Use of Artificial Intelligence in Manuscript Preparation

Authors may use AI tools for limited purposes such as language editing, grammar refinement, or formatting assistance. However:

  1. AI tools must not be listed as authors.
  2. AI tools must not replace substantial intellectual contribution.
  3. AI tools must not be used to fabricate data, generate results, manipulate images, or produce analysis without proper human verification.
  4. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all content.

Any use of AI tools in manuscript preparation must be transparently disclosed in a designated “Use of AI Services” section.

Failure to disclose significant AI use may constitute a breach of publication ethics.

 

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

The journal recognizes the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in scholarly communication. While AI may assist with technical aspects of writing, all scholarly responsibility rests with human authors, reviewers, and editors.

AI systems cannot meet authorship criteria and therefore must not be listed as authors.

The use of AI in ways that compromise confidentiality, research integrity, or independent scholarly judgment is strictly prohibited.

The journal reserves the right to request clarification regarding AI use at any stage of review or publication.

 

__________________

References:

Committee on Publication Ethics. (n.d.). COPE core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2023). COPE position statement: Authorship and AI tools. https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements

Committee on Publication Ethics. (2023). COPE discussion document: Artificial intelligence (AI) in decision making. https://publicationethics.org/resources/discussion-documents

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2023). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

 

 

Plagiarism Screening

JPU uses many platforms for plagiarism screening of every accepted submission, including Google and iThenticate Software. 

 

Corrections and Retractions

In accordance with generally accepted standards of scholarly publishing, JPU does not alter articles after publication. In the case of serious errors or misconduct, however, JPU publishes corrections of serious errors that affect the article, but not fully invalidate the results. The correction note will be published and linked to the published article. The published article will be left as is, with no change.

Retractions is only possible if: 

  • there is a clear evidence that the presented findings are invalid and unreliable,
  • the article constitutes plagiarism,
  • the article has been published elsewhere,
  • the article reports unethical research.

The retraction note will be published and will replace the retracted article.