- Editorial Team
- Reviewer List
- Focus & Scope
- Duties of Authors
- Duties of Reviewers
- Publication Ethics
- Authors Guidelines
- Reviewers Guidelines
- Statement of Originality
- Visitor Statistics
- Open Access Policy
- Screening for Plagiarism
- Author Fees
- Copyright and License Notice
- Abstracting and Indexing
Manuscripts submitted for publication in the “Keluwih: Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora” (Keluwih: JSH) are subjected to double-blind peer review. Neither the reviewer nor the author knows who the author and reviewer are. This anonymity is needed to ensure an objective and unbiased assessment of the reviewed text. Reviewers are advised to consider important aspects of the text when conducting a review.
- Reporting of Original Results: Results reported in the manuscript must be the original and authentic work of the author. The manuscript does not contain deviations from academic integrity, such as - and is not limited to - fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, illegal authorship, and plural publications (not currently or never previously published).
- Experiments and Analysis: Experiments and analyzes must meet recognized technical standards and must be explained systematically. The research presented in a manuscript should help author make accurate conclusions based on statistical data. Methods and experiments must be detailed.
- Interpretation of Results: The author must present and interpret the results and conclusions in an appropriately and comprehensively. The authors must be able to convey the results of their studies (outcomes). An incomplete interpretation of the results can result in rejection of the manuscript.
- Experiments Involving Humans and Animals: Research must meet the highest applicable international standards of experimental ethics and research integrity.
Important Points To Consider
Reviewers are expected to provide advice on the following points in their review reports:
- Is the manuscript written comprehensively enough to be understood? If not, how could it be improved?
- Is sufficient evidence provided for the declaration?
- Have the authors discussed the previous findings fairly?
- Does this paper offer sufficient methodological details to reproduce experiments?
- Are the results and interpretations delivered sufficient for a conclusion to be drawn?
- Do conclusions contain integration between research objectives, literature review, and results?