FOCUS AND SCOPE

Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya (JPS) accepts submissions of original article, literature review, case reports, and Systematic Review and Meta Analysis in English with the scope of:

- Mental Health.

- Neuroscience.

- Mental Disorders.

- Psychology.

- Psychological well-being.

- Community Psychiatry.

- CLP (Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry).

- Geriatric.

- Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

SECTION POLICIES

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

•  Open Submissions
•  Indexed
•  Peer Reviewed

REVIEW ARTICLE/ LITERATURE REVIEW

•  Open Submissions
•  Indexed
• Peer Reviewed

CASE REPORT

•  Open Submissions
•  Indexed
• Peer Reviewed

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META ANALYSIS

•  Open Submissions
•  Indexed
•  Peer Reviewed

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

All articles submitted to the Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya (Surabaya Psychiatry Journal) must adhere to the Focus and Scope as well as the Author Guidelines of this publication. Submitted manuscripts must demonstrate scientific merit and/or novelty or provide a new contribution to knowledge relevant to the journal's emphasis and scope. All manuscripts submitted to the JPS undergo an initial Editorial Review. Manuscripts that fail to align with the focus and scope of the JPS or do not adhere to the fundamental author rules of the journal will be rejected without external review. The manuscripts that have undergone editorial review will be submitted for official peer assessments.

All manuscripts submitted to this publication must be composed in proficient English. Authors whose native language is not English are advised to have their manuscript reviewed for grammatical accuracy and clarity prior to submission. International Science Editing and Asia Science Editing offer English language and copyediting services. The work must not have been published or submitted for publication in any other venue. They must present a certificate of English proofreading upon request by the Editor.

All submitted works must be devoid of plagiarism. All authors are advised to utilize plagiarism detection software for similarity assessment (preferably employ Turnitin for this purpose). Editors will assess the similarity of papers in this journal utilizing Turnitin software.

Typically, two peer reviewers will be assigned to each paper in a double-blind manner; however, the Journal may designate additional reviewers for specialized insights on statistics or methodologies. Upon receiving reports from the peer reviewers, the editors will assess the recommendations, which often include: 1) Accept and publish, with or without editorial modifications, 2) Accept with minor amendments, 3) Consider substantial improvements, 4) Reject. The reviews will address the originality, conceptual or technical aspects of the investigation, and the interpretation of the results. The editors will document the decision and notify the authors accordingly.

In the event of a disagreement between two reviewers, the final decision will rest solely with the editorial team

When writers are requested to rewrite the manuscript, they must meticulously scrutinize sentence structure, the completeness and quality of the text, references, tables, and graphical elements of the revised article. Authors must address each reviewer’s remarks and submit the revised manuscript in a separate document. In the amended paper, the writers must indicate the modifications made by presenting the text in a different color.

The Editor-in-Chief will possess the ultimate authority to determine the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. The Editorial Board retains the authority to modify articles concerning style, structure, and clarity. Manuscripts with numerous problems in any area, such as spelling or punctuation, will be returned to authors for improvement prior to resubmission or may be outright refused.

The Editor-in-Chief will publish accepted articles by assigning them to issues based on the order of acceptance, geographical distribution of contributors, and topical relevance.

Peer review process: The manuscript that has passed the initial review stage will be sent to at least two reviewers who are experts in the field of the submitted manuscript. The reviewers will be provided with an assessment form and are encouraged to provide comments directly on the text of the manuscript.

Review decision: The reviewer's decision will be considered by the Editors to determine the subsequent process of the manuscript. The following recommendations will be provided by the reviewers:

- Accept submission: means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication without any revisions or changes.

- Revision required: means that the manuscript is acceptable for publication after being revised in response to the reviewers' comments.

- Resubmit for review: means that substantive inadequacies in the manuscript, such as data analysis or research variable, type of research, the main theory used, and rewriting of paragraphs so need to be revised and resubmit.

- Decline submission: means that the manuscript cannot be accepted for publication because it is not within the scope of the required research or the review provided is related to a very basic problem.

The reviewer's decision will be considered by the Board of Editors to determine the ensuing process of the manuscript.

Revision stage: After the manuscript is received with a revision note or re-submission, the manuscript will be sent back to the author with the review form from the reviewers and the revision form. When returning the revised manuscript, the author is required to fill in and attach the manuscript revision form provided. If the revised manuscript does not match the comments given by the reviewer, the manuscript will be returned to the author for revision.

Final decision: The final decision on the acceptability, or otherwise, of manuscripts will be taken by the editor-in-chief based on reviewers' comments presented during an editorial board meeting. Scanning for instances of plagiarism present in manuscripts will be conducted by means of Turnitin software. The manuscript can still be rejected if the author is not serious about making the necessary revisions.

Proofreading process: Once the manuscript has been deemed acceptable by the Board of Editors, it will undergo a proofreading process to maintain linguistic quality.

Final stage: The final layout of the manuscript will be sent back to the author to ensure that the content matches the author's writing. The author can revise any typos found in the final manuscript. After confirmation from the author is given, the Editor will process the manuscript for publication.

PUBLICATION FREQUENCY

Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya (Surabaya Psychiatry Journal) is published twice a year (May and November).

OPEN ACCESS POLICY

Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya (JPS) open access, free-of-charge access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

ARCHIVING

This journal utilizes the 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.

ARTICLE-PROCESSING CHARGES

a. Article Submission Fee: 0.00 (IDR)

No charge for manuscript submission

b. Article Processing Charge: 0.00 (IDR)

No article processing charges or any other charges are applied by Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya.

PLAGIARISM STATEMENT

The editors of Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya will screen all submitted manuscripts for plagiarism using the Turnitin plagiarism checker. We accept articles with plagiarism of less than 20%.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya (JPS) is a journal that aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies focused on psychiatry, psychology, mental health and all related diseases as well as related topics that have neither been published elsewhere in any language nor are under review for publication anywhere. The following statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the authors, the editors, and the reviewers. This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. 

Duties of Authors

1. The author's primary responsibility is to provide precise and comprehensive information regarding the conducted research. The study data must encompass adequate information on the pertinent issue.
2. Authors must guarantee the originality of their work and ensure that no fraud or fabrication is present in their document.
3. Authors must ensure that the article has not been previously published or is under consideration for publication elsewhere.
4. Authors must guarantee that their works are devoid of any illegal assertions and any remarks that may contravene the law.
5. Authors acknowledge and comply with the misconduct policy in subsection Research Misconduct Policy.

Duties of Editor

1. Editors must render impartial evaluations of all manuscripts based solely on quality, without consideration of the author's race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional connection.
2. Editors are obligated to evaluate all submitted manuscripts within a reasonable timeframe.
3. Editors, utilizing their experience and impartial judgment, are tasked with the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts. They are to establish effective communication with authors over the publication of articles. The ultimate judgment will include the reviewer’s commentary.
4. Editors must ensure that no private information of authors is contained in the document submitted to reviewers.
5. Editors must maintain the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and refrain from disclosing any information regarding the manuscript under review to external parties.
6. Editors must honor the author's request to exclude specific reviewers, provided there is a well-reasoned justification for the objection, while evaluating their submission. Editors may opt to utilize one or more of these reviewers if their professional insights are deemed significant for the manuscript's publication.
7. Editors must adhere to COPE guidelines while evaluating an article for publication.

Duties of Reviewers

Each manuscript will undergo critical evaluation by a minimum of two anonymous reviewers, chosen for their expertise in the relevant subject matter. The acceptance of the manuscript will be contingent upon its scientific excellence and appropriateness for the Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya. A paper may be accepted as is, accepted with revisions, or rejected.

The reviewers' and editor's recommendations will be sent to the author, who will then have the option to amend the manuscript. A manuscript returned to an author for modification may be retained for a maximum duration of eight weeks.

The approved manuscript will be revised by native English speakers. The language editing service is being offered at no cost.

All submitted manuscripts will undergo originality verification using Turnitin.

Reviewers must adhere to the following ethical guidelines:

1. The primary responsibility of a reviewer (referee) is to impartially evaluate the entire document using rigorous scientific and literary criteria.
2. Referees must regard the submitted manuscript as confidential documents.
3. The identity of the referee shall remain confidential until the editors decide differently.
4. Referees must finalize the manuscript review within a reasonable timeframe and promptly notify the editors if the assessment cannot be completed as scheduled.
5. Reviewers must articulate and furnish sufficient professional judgment for their assessment of a paper.
6. Reviewers must swiftly inform the editors if they believe the manuscript may be misused by others in a manner that threatens public health and safety.

Conflict of Interest Policy

Authors, Editors and Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following guidelines in compliance with COPE practices.

1. Authors should clearly inform their source of financial support -institution, private, and/or corporate- for their research
2. Should the author and editor of Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya have a relationship which may lead to an unfair evaluation another editor will be appointed instead.
3. Reviewers should be aware for any appearance of conflict of interest when receive a manuscript for evaluation and are required to promptly return the manuscript to editor, informing the conflict of interest issue.

Data and Responsibility

Data availability and reporting guidelines are available in section 'Author Guidelines'

Research Misconduct Policy

The purpose of this policy is to prevent any misconduct related to research conducted for the journals and to suggest the fundamental principles and structural procedures in relation to research integrity deliberation required to ensure research ethics.

The range of misconduct policy

Research misconduct suggested in this policy pertains to fraud and refers to data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and improper authorship.

1. "Fabrication" denotes any action that entails the generation of misleading information regarding non-existent facts or discoveries.
2. "Falsification" denotes the deliberate alteration of research materials, equipment, or processes, or the arbitrary modification or deletion of data, leading to erroneous study findings or outcomes.
3. "Falsification" denotes the deliberate alteration of research materials, equipment, or processes, as well as arbitrary modification or deletion of data, leading to erroneous study findings or outcomes.
4. "Plagiarism" denotes the unauthorized appropriation of others' ideas, research materials, and findings without proper citations or permissions.
5. "Improper authorship" denotes instances where an individual who has contributed to research findings lacks the requisite scientific and technical qualifications to be recognized as an author, or where an individual who has not contributed to the research is listed as an author solely for reasons of gratitude or courtesy.
6. Deliberate actions to disrupt a fraud investigation concerning oneself or others, or actions that may jeopardize informants.
7. Injustice in the assessment of others' research, or the unauthorized disclosure or appropriation of research concepts or findings obtained during the review process.
8. Gravely deviant actions that are unacceptable within the scientific and technological community.

How does the journal address misconduct

Editors and publishers have an ethical obligation to:

1. Support the quality and ethics of the review process (pre-publication: weed out; prevent)
2. Ensure the correctness of the published literature (post-publication: correct; communicate)
3. Educate (prevent)

Editors and journals has an ethical duty to respond to and address ethical allegations concerning published articles or those under review. Protocols and methodologies exist for examining and resolving instances of misbehavior, including collaboration with inquiries from institutions or funding organizations.

Posible Sanction

1. Before publication (during the review process): The manuscript may be retreacted from evaluation.
2. Post-publication literature correction. The journal may publish a Retreaction, Note of Editorial Concern, or Errata/Correction with the signature of the author(s) or an editorial statement regarding the curcumstance.
3. Editors ascertain wheter to withdraw or correct after evaluating if the situation involves fraud or an inadvertent error. They evaluate the intent and the degree to wich the data is erroneous or deceptive.
4. The author may face a ban on submission to the journal.
5. Editors may, in certain instances, furnish information for other editors or publishers.
6. Editors may publish an editorial in the journal to address the topic boradly and enchance awereness of the matter.

Ethical Supervision
All submitted papers and communications between writers and editors in Jurnal Psikiatri Surabaya will be regarded as confidential. Disclosures pertaining to the publication process must not be made on any website without prior approval from the editors.

The names and email addresses provided on this journal site will be utilized solely for the specified purposes of this journal and will not be disclosed for any other reason or to any third party.

Concerning research that entails trials on animals, the authors must guarantee a comprehensive evaluation of any potential harm to the animals involved. This entails a thorough analysis of the specific methodologies and experiments, as well as the quantities and species of animals employed. The animals involved in the experiment must comply with institutional and national regulations. The papers must assert that all measures were taken to minimize animal pain.