Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The JKPK (Jurnal Kimia dan Pendidikan Kimia) is a national journal, published three times a year in April, August, and December, containing research articles on Chemistry and Chemistry education,covers topics related to:

Chemistry Education

Inorganic Chemistry

Physic Chemistry

Organic Chemistry

Biochemistry

Enviromental Chemistry

Analytical Chemistry

The article is written in Indonesian or English, Incoming articles are reviewed by the double-blind review process, so the information containing: author's name, author's address, contact number and email for correspondence purposes are written on a separate page.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Analytical, and Environmental Chemistry

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Organic and Biochemistry

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Physic, Material, and Inorganic Chemistry

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Chemistry Education

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Doeble Blind review

Every article that goes to the editorial staff will be selected through Initial Review processes by Editorial Board. Then, the articles will be sent to the peer reviewers and will go to the next selection by Double Blind Preview Process.

Every proposal submitted for publication is read at least by an editor, for an initial review. If the paper agrees with editorial policies and with a minimum quality level, is sent to two reviewers (starting from volume 11 issue 3, the minimum reviewer will be increased to three reviewers). The reviewers won't know the author's identity, as any identifying information will be stripped from the document before review.

Reviewers' comments to the editors are confidential and before passing on to the author will made anonymous. Based on the reviewers' comments, the Editorial Board makes a final decision on the acceptability of the manuscript, and communicates to the authors the decision, along with referees' reports. Whether significant revisions are proposed, acceptance is dependent on whether the author can deal with those satisfactorily.

Similarity

The incoming article will be processed similarity with turnitin. Articles with similarity less than 30% will be proceed to reviewer, but with more than 30% will be communicated to the author for revision or rejection.

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.

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...

Publication Frequency

This journal published three times a year in April, August, and December.

Review Guidelines

Reviewers are requested to submit a review report via OJS and can upload the report files for Editor and Author.

The review process of the JKPK manuscript with OJS is described in the REVIEW GUIDELINE file, The Indonesian version file can be downloaded here.

For reviewers preferring to communicate the results of manuscript review via e-mail, can submit the review result and review form to the e-mail address: jkpk@fkip.uns.ac.id or Section Editor.

download Review Form

Section Editor contact:

Email: srimulyaniuns@gmail.com

HP. 081548603734

Complaints and Appeals

1. General Concerns or Complaints

If author have any concerns or complaints regarding publication in JKPK (Jurnal Kimia dan Pendidikan Kimia), please email jkpk@fkip.uns.ac.id.

Note that we do not oversee or comment on editorial decisions for any of our journals.

JKPK strives to acknowledge receipt of author email within ten business days. Our Research Integrity and Inclusion Manager will then investigate according to COPE guidelines, ensuring proper procedures have been followed. This includes reviewing the submission history and correspondence between the author, editor, and reviewers.

The author will be informed of the investigation's outcome in writing. While JKPK aims to resolve issues as quickly as possible, typically within six weeks, some investigations may take longer due to the complexity of the issue, availability of data, involvement of multiple authors and papers, or participation of external parties like the author's institution.
To ensure due process, JKPK kindly ask that you refrain from public commentary until the investigation concludes.
If the author wishes to further pursue a complaint, the author may contact COPE directly. More information is available on the COPE website.

2. Complaints about Our Publications

All concerns regarding JKPK published content are investigated confidentially and in line with COPE guidelines, regardless of the complainant's status or identity. Often, an internal review is conducted to decide if a full investigation is necessary. Any investigation will be conducted in collaboration with the author and the journal editor.

JKPK strives to maintain the complainant's anonymity as much as possible, though certain complaints may inadvertently reveal their identity. Once an investigation is concluded and appropriate action is determined, JKPK will inform the complainant. However, to maintain confidentiality, JKPK cannot provide regular updates during the investigation.

3. Appealing the Editorial Decision

Editors have wide discretion in deciding if a submission is suitable for their journal. Many submissions are declined without external review, often accompanied by a general rejection statement. Such decisions cannot be formally appealed.

However, if an author believes that the rejection did not follow journal policies and procedures, they may appeal by submitting a detailed, point-by-point response to the reviewer and editor comments. The editor will then review the peer review process. If the decision adhered to the editorial criteria, the editor's rejection decision is final.

4. Appealing Corrective Action Taken Post Publication

When concerns are raised about a published article, the editor will decide, following COPE guidelines, including those on retraction, whether the article needs to be retracted or if other corrective actions or notifications are necessary.

Authors can appeal this decision if new evidence affecting the initial decision emerges before the specified comment deadline. These appeals will be reviewed by the Editor and/or external scientific advisors. Decisions on appeals regarding retraction and expressions of concern are final.

5. Independent Assessment and Supporting Information

Complaints and appeals should identify the relevant manuscript or article, state the reasons for the request, provide supporting evidence, and disclose relevant competing interests. A sufficiently specific and credible anonymous complaint may be considered. Raising a concern in good faith must not lead to retaliation or a publication penalty.

A person whose conduct is challenged must not decide their own case. The matter must be reviewed by an unconflicted editor or appropriate independent representative, who may examine the original decision, review reports, correspondence, responses from the parties involved, and independent advice. The journal will communicate a reasoned outcome while protecting confidentiality as far as practicable. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance or reversal of a decision.

Any submission restriction arising from an integrity case must be proportionate, justified, time-limited, and open to appeal. Allegations about the underlying research are handled under Allegations of Research Misconduct; concerns about the fairness of the handling process may be raised through this complaints procedure.

Ethics and policies

Ethics in publishing

Authors must follow ethical guidelines stated in JKPK's Publishing Ethics Policy.

Submission declaration

When authors submit an article to JKPK (Jurnal Kimia dan Pendidikan Kimia), it is implied that:

The work described has not been published previously
The article is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
The article's publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out.
If accepted, the article will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically, without the written consent of the copyright holder.

To verify compliance with JKPK journal publishing policies, we may check the author's manuscript with screening tools.

Authorship

All authors should have made substantial contributions to all of the following:

The conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data
Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
Final approval of the version to be submitted.

All authors are accountable for all aspects of the work to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Corresponding author

Authors must appoint a single corresponding author to communicate with the journal during the editorial process. This individual submits the manuscript and all required documentation to the journal and serves as the primary contact between the journal and the co-authors. It is important that all contact details of the corresponding author are kept up to date throughout the submission and publication process.

Only the corresponding author’s affiliation will be used to determine eligibility for a publishing agreement and possible discounts related to it. Affiliations of other co-authors are not relevant for eligibility.

Changes to authorship

The editors of this journal generally will not consider changes to authorship once a manuscript has been submitted. It is important that authors carefully consider the authorship list and order of authors and provide a definitive author list at submission.

The policy of this journal around authorship changes:

All authors must be listed in the manuscript and their details entered into the submission system. Changes can only be made prior to acceptance and only if approved by the journal editor. This includes additions, deletions, or rearrangements of author names.
Requests to change authorship must be made by the corresponding author. The corresponding author must provide the reason for the request to the journal editor with written confirmation from all authors, including any authors being added or removed, that they agree with the changes. Requests that do not comply with the instructions outlined in the form will not be considered.
This journal does not allow authorship changes after acceptance. This includes additions, deletions, or the rearrangement of author names, including changes to the corresponding author.
The review process may be paused while a change in authorship request is being considered.
Change requests made by the authors without editor approval may result in the rejection of the manuscript or retraction if the article has already been published.

Funding sources

Authors must disclose any funding sources that provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article.

List funding sources in this standard way to facilitate compliance with the funder's requirements.

If no funding has been provided for the research, it is recommended to include the following sentence:

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Declaration of generative AI use

Authors must declare the use of generative AI tools in the manuscript preparation process upon submission of the paper.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies (“AI tools”) have been rapidly adopted in research and scholarly publishing, offering significant benefits while requiring clear standards for responsible and transparent use.

Authors preparing a manuscript for this journal may use AI tools to support them. However, these tools must never be used as a substitute for human critical thinking, expertise and evaluation. AI tools may only be applied with human oversight and control.

Ultimately, authors are responsible and accountable for the contents of their work. This includes accountability for:

Carefully reviewing and verifying the accuracy, comprehensiveness, and impartiality of all AI-generated output (including checking the sources, as AI-generated references can be incorrect or fabricated).
Editing and adapting all material thoroughly to ensure the manuscript represents the author’s authentic and original contribution and reflects their own analysis, interpretation, insights and ideas.
Ensuring accuracy and originality of any AI-generated images and providing appropriate attribution where relevant.
Ensuring the use of any tools or sources, AI-based or otherwise, is made clear and transparent to readers. If AI tools have been used, we require a disclosure statement upon submission.
Ensuring the manuscript is developed in a way that safeguards data privacy, intellectual property and other rights, by checking the terms and conditions of any AI tool that is used.

Finally, authors must not list or cite AI tools as an author or co-author on the manuscript since authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to, and performed by, humans.

The use of AI tools in the manuscript preparation process must be declared by adding a statement at the end of the manuscript when the paper is first submitted. The statement will appear in the published work and should be placed in a new section before the references list.

The declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools, such as tools used to check grammar, spelling, and references. In addition, authors are not required to disclose the use of AI tools or features within specialist disability-related assistive technology, provided these are used solely for accessibility purposes.

If you have nothing to disclose, you do not need to add a statement.

Please note: to protect authors’ rights and the confidentiality of their research, this journal does not currently allow academic editors and reviewers to upload an unpublished manuscript into a generative AI tool. However, AI tools may be used in a supportive capacity by editors and reviewers to improve the structure and language of the review report or editorial decision letter or to conduct a background literature search.

Additional Requirements for AI Disclosure and Research Evidence

The AI-use declaration should identify the tool and version where available, the purpose and extent of its use, and how human authors checked the output. If AI assistance forms part of the research methods, including data processing or analysis, its use must also be described in the Methods section with sufficient detail for evaluation and reproducibility. Generative AI must not create or alter images presented as empirical research evidence; legitimate image processing must be transparent and must not misrepresent the underlying observations.

AI Assistance in Peer Review and Editorial Work

The existing prohibition on uploading unpublished manuscripts to generative AI tools also applies to manuscript extracts, figures, confidential review reports, and confidential editorial correspondence where authorization and suitable confidentiality safeguards are absent. An author’s use of AI does not authorize reviewers or editors to disclose the manuscript to an AI service.

Reviewers must obtain prior editorial permission for any AI assistance in an assessment and disclose permitted use. Support for language, report structure, or background literature searches remains subject to confidentiality safeguards and human verification. AI cannot replace expert assessment or accountable judgment, and it must not make the final acceptance, rejection, or research-integrity determination. Editors and editorial staff are subject to equivalent privacy, confidentiality, and accountability requirements.

Suspected misuse should be reported privately with relevant evidence. An automated AI-detection score alone is not a sufficient basis for a finding of misconduct. Material misuse will be assessed under the journal’s publication ethics, research misconduct, and correction and retraction procedures.