Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Indigenous Knowledge is a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary journal published by the Local Wisdom and Criminal Law Research Group Universitas Sebelas Maret. We aim to present scholarly research on Indigenous worldviews and experiences of decolonization from Indigenous perspectives from around the world. Indigenous Knowledge has been the leading source for scholarship by Indigenous peoples and for those working alongside and with Indigenous communities. Indigenous Knowledge provides the latest thinking and practice in Indigenous scholarship, has created an international Indigenous academic community and has generated an understanding of Indigenous academic discourse.
Indigenous Knowledge is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary journal that publishes scholarship across the Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Health, Business, and Law.

It publishes articles engaging with a variety of theoretical debates in areas including:

  • Cultural studies
  • Education
  • Human Geography
  • Health
  • Business
  • Law
  • History
  • Politics
  • Philosophy
  • Literature
  • Visual and Performing Arts
  • Environmental studies
  • Psychology
  • Sociology

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Indigenous Knowledge maintains the standards of double blind-peer review while increasing the efficiency of the process. All research articles published in the Indigenous Knowledge journal undergo full peer review, key characteristics of which are listed below:

  1. Indigenous Knowledge is applying a two-stage process: After the technical check your submission will be first reviewed by the editorial team for publication suitability in the journal. If suitable, it will then be assigned to one of the editors for handling the review and decision process.
  2. If your manuscript matches the scope and satisfies the criteria of Indigenous Knowledge, your paper will be assigned to an Editor. The Editor will identify and contact reviewers who are acknowledged experts in the field. Since peer-review is a voluntary service, it can take some time but please be assured that the Editor will regularly remind reviewers if they do not reply in a timely manner. During this stage, the status will appear as "Under Review".

  3. Once the Editor has received the minimum number of expert reviews, the status will change to "Required Reviews Complete".

  4. It is also possible that the Editor may decide that your manuscript does not meet the journal criteria or scope and that it should not be considered further. In this case, the Editor will immediately notify you that the manuscript has been rejected and may recommend a more suitable journal.


Peer review of referred papers:

Editors of the Indigenous Knowledge journal will decide promptly whether to accept, reject or request revisions of referred papers based on the reviews and editorial insight of the supporting journals. Also, Editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews when needed. The authors will be advised when Editors decide, further review is required. Submitted articles will be first review by the editor for the topic and writing style according to the guidelines. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer-review, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence. In short, the steps are:

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

The steps point number 1 to 5 are considered as 1 round of the peer-reviewing process (see the grey area in the figure). The 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. Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form;
  2. Accepted by Minor Revisions, the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections (let authors revised with stipulated time);
  3. Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revised with stipulated time);
  4. Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes;
  5. Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.

 


 

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.

 

Focus and Scope

Indigenous Knowledge is a peer-reviewed interdisciplinary journal published by the Local Wisdom and Criminal Law Research Group Universitas Sebelas Maret. We aim to present scholarly research on Indigenous worldviews and experiences of decolonization from Indigenous perspectives from around the world. Indigenous Knowledge has been the leading source for scholarship by Indigenous peoples and for those working alongside and with Indigenous communities. Indigenous Knowledge provides the latest thinking and practice in Indigenous scholarship, has created an international Indigenous academic community and has generated an understanding of Indigenous academic discourse.
Indigenous Knowledge is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary journal that publishes scholarship across the Social Sciences, Humanities, Education, Health, Business, and Law.

It publishes articles engaging with a variety of theoretical debates in areas including:

  • Cultural studies
  • Education
  • Human Geography
  • Health
  • Business
  • Law
  • History
  • Politics
  • Philosophy
  • Literature
  • Visual and Performing Arts
  • Environmental studies
  • Psychology
  • Sociology

 

Plagiarism Policy

  1. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not allowed;
  2. 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;
  3. 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;
  4. 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.

Working Process:

  1. Editorial Team checking manuscript on offline and online database manually (checking proper citation and quotation);
  2. Editorial Team checking manuscript by using Turnitin app. If it is found plagiarism indication (more than 15%), the board will reject the manuscript immediately.

 

Publication Ethics

Indigenous Knowledge is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the Indigenous Knowledge does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the Indigenous Knowledge, are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Section A: Publication and authorship 

  1. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular manuscript.
  2. The review process is double-blind peer-review.
  3. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 
  4. The authors must participate in the peer-review process. 
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. The authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. The authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review 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. 

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of research funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

 

Withdrawal of Manuscripts

The author is not allowed to withdraw the submitted manuscripts because the withdrawal is a waste of valuable resources that editors and referees spent a great deal of time processing the submitted manuscripts, and works invested by the Publisher. However, the authors could suggest the withdrawal if there is no updated progress review information after six months from our side.

Email for requesting withdrawal: riskaandi@staff.uns.ac.id