Focus and Scope

The aim of this journal publication is to disseminate the conceptual thoughts or ideas and research results that have been achieved in the area of community services.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Articles submitted to Buletin Abdi Masyarakat will be reviewed by reviewers. Accepted whether or not it is determined by the Chief Editor Team based on the comments from the reviewers. The decision on the acceptance of the text is determined in the Editor Session. Reviewer does not know the author and the author does not know the reviewer (Double Blind Review).

Open Access Policy

This journal 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.

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Buletin Abdi Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed journal published by Universitas YPPI Rembang. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Buletin Abdi Masyarakat is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

The publisher of Buletin Abdi Masyarakat takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Publisher and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of Buletin Abdi Masyarakat is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

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.

Confidentiality

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.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

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.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

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.

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.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

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 have personal knowledge.

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.

Duties of Authors

Authors of reports 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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

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.

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.

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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Screening for Plagiarism

In order to avoid any plagiarism claims on published article in Buletin Abdi Masyarakat, the editor urges the authors to ensure that each article to be published does not constitute:

• the article has been previously published elsewhere
• the article has been or will be submitted to the patent

In addition, the plagiarism element check is conducted through Turnitin.

Article Processing Charge

FREE OF CHARGE for Submitting, Processing, and Publishing the Article in Buletin Abdi Masyarakat. Authors will be informed on the decision on their manuscript(s) within 1-2 month of submission following the acceptance of their manuscript

How to Online Review

There are 2 ways a reviewer can get an account:
a. Register yourself (on the main menu link "Register")
b. Registered by the Journal Manager (fill in the reviewer form) (recommended)

How to register yourself (a):
a. On the main menu, click "Register"
b. Fill in the registration form, with an asterisk that must be filled in, such as: username, password, repeat password, validation, first name, last name, and email
c. Don't forget the bottom line, you can also offer yourself as a Reviewer (on the Register As line)
d. Click Register when finished
If (a) fails, please contact email bam.yppi@gmail.com to be registered by the journal manager (b)

How to review
a. Log in as a reviewer
b. Select articles sent by clicking "1 active": number 1 indicates the number of articles handled
c. Select the title of the article
d. Follow the review instructions, there are 5 steps:

1. Reply to the Editor's Response to the article submission, select Will do the Review, then send the email
2. If you don't know how to review, please download the review guide or contact the editor
3. Download the article, open it and then comment on the file
4. Give a review of the article and fill out the review form
5. Upload documents that have been given comments
6. Give Recommendations

e. Send an email when you have done the review process
f. Done

Reviewer Guidelines

For Buletin Abdi Masyarakat reviewer

Your review will examine the material according to the standard components of the article. If the contents of the article deviate significantly, please write down your comments.

Title: The title must describe the subject of the text, be clear, and not have multiple interpretations. Please suggest a better title if needed.

Abstract: Abstract must be stated briefly (no more than 300 words) by writing the research objective, method used, and the substance of the research result. Please remind that abstract is the first thing that is highlighted in an article.

Reference / citation review: The author must credit the contributions of others relevant to the article through citations. The citation in the introduction must be able to show the innovation and / or novelty that the author has made through gap analysis. Quotations / citations should not be excessive.

Research Aim: The purpose of the article review must be significant and clearly stated in the introduction.

Methods: The methods used to achieve the objectives must be described in a precise, systematic manner, and sufficiently detailed to allow competent readers to do the work the author is doing.

Clarity: The text must develop / explain the research subject in a logical and effective manner. The author must write any information and research results in the article in a simple, concise, systematic, effective manner.

Presentation of Graphics, Tables and Figure: All must be given a title and in good format, include sources and referenced in the text / paragraph. Statements in text must match the contents of tables and figures.

Conclusion: Conclusions must be stated precisely, clearly, answer the problem, and must be supported by the data in the analysis.

References: Using the reference manager (Mendeley), all references in the manuscript must be in the Bibliography.

References of at least 15 pieces with 60% primary references (scientific journals, proceeding articles, reference books, thesis / dissertation) and published within the last 5 (five) years.

*Reviewers can download additional articles and files. Provide input on the components in the manuscript, fill out a review form or upload a file for the editor and / or writer regarding the results of the review. Reviewers are expected to be able to provide recommendations regarding the quality of the articles. Reviews must be completed within a maximum of 2 weeks. If you need more time, you can submit it to our Editors.