The Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia (JPII) focuses on the publication and dissemination of scholarly and professional contributions from researchers, engineers, and professional engineers. The journal provides a platform for sharing scientific findings, engineering innovations, practical experiences, and problem-solving approaches that contribute to the advancement of engineering practice and professional development in Indonesia.
JPII welcomes various types of scholarly articles, including original research articles, review articles, case study articles, and short reviews or comprehensive reviews. Submissions may address theoretical developments, experimental investigations, engineering design, project implementation, industrial applications, technology development, and practical solutions to engineering problems.
The journal covers engineering and applied sciences across conventional engineering disciplines and life science-related fields, including agriculture, animal science, fisheries, and marine sciences. Particular emphasis is placed on the practical application of engineering principles, innovation, safety, sustainability, professional responsibility, and engineering ethics.
JPII welcomes manuscripts covering, but not limited to, the following fields:
1. Industrial and Engineering Technologies
Mechanical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Chemical Engineering
Industrial Engineering
Engineering design, manufacturing, and process optimization
Industrial operations, maintenance, and asset management
Occupational health, safety, and environmental management in engineering practice
2. Civil Engineering and Building Engineering
Structural and construction engineering
Water resources engineering and hydraulic systems
River engineering and watershed management
Dam engineering, reservoir management, and sedimentation control
Infrastructure planning, construction, and maintenance
Sustainable construction and building engineering
3. Informatics, Computer Engineering, and Information Systems
Computer engineering and information technology
Software engineering and application development
Information systems design and implementation
Artificial intelligence and data analytics for engineering applications
Automation, digitalization, and smart engineering systems
Internet of Things (IoT) and industrial digital technologies
4. Biological Resources Engineering and Applied Life Sciences
Agricultural engineering and agricultural technology
Livestock production systems and animal science applications
Fisheries engineering and aquaculture technology
Marine engineering and marine resource management
Post-harvest technology and agro-industrial processing
Sustainable management and utilization of biological resources
5. Cross-Disciplinary and Professional Engineering Practice
JPII also welcomes interdisciplinary contributions addressing engineering challenges across multiple sectors, including:
Engineering project management and implementation
Natural resource management and sustainable development
Renewable energy and energy efficiency
Environmental engineering, waste management, and resource recovery
Engineering risk assessment, reliability, and operational safety
Professional engineering ethics, standards, and regulatory compliance
Engineering innovation and technology implementation in industrial and community settings
JPII encourages submissions that demonstrate scientific rigor, practical relevance, innovation, and measurable contributions to engineering practice. The journal aims to strengthen collaboration among researchers, academics, engineers, industry professionals, and other stakeholders in developing effective, safe, and sustainable engineering solutions.
Peer reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the integrity, quality, and credibility of the scholarly record. The peer review process relies on the trust, cooperation, and active participation of the scientific and professional communities. All parties involved in the process, including editors, reviewers, authors, and publishers, are expected to conduct themselves responsibly, fairly, and ethically.
Although peer review is central to scholarly publishing, reviewers may not always be fully aware of their ethical responsibilities. Therefore, Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia (JPII) is committed to providing transparent peer review policies and clear guidance to ensure that manuscripts are evaluated consistently, objectively, fairly, and within a reasonable timeframe.
Reviewers are expected to provide constructive and evidence-based feedback that helps authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. Their assessments should assist editors in making informed editorial decisions while maintaining confidentiality, impartiality, and professional integrity.
JPII encourages clear communication between the editorial team and reviewers to facilitate an effective and timely review process. This policy is intended to guide reviewers in fulfilling their responsibilities, assist editors in managing the peer review process, and promote ethical research and publication practices within the engineering profession.
Editors are responsible for selecting appropriate reviewers whose expertise and professional backgrounds are relevant to the subject matter of each submitted manuscript. Reviewers should possess sufficient knowledge and experience to assess the scientific merit, technical accuracy, originality, methodological soundness, and practical relevance of the work under consideration.
Potential reviewers must provide accurate and verifiable information regarding their professional qualifications, institutional affiliations, areas of expertise, and contact details. Any attempt to impersonate another individual or misrepresent one's identity or qualifications during the peer review process constitutes serious misconduct.
Upon receiving an invitation to review a manuscript, reviewers should accept the invitation only if they have the appropriate expertise and can evaluate the manuscript objectively. If a manuscript contains aspects that fall outside their area of competence, reviewers should inform the editor and clearly identify any limitations in their expertise.
Reviewers are expected to:
Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and independently, based on scholarly and professional merit.
Provide clear, constructive, and substantiated comments to help authors improve their work.
Assess the originality, technical quality, methodological appropriateness, validity of conclusions, and relevance to the scope of JPII.
Identify relevant publications that have not been cited by the authors when appropriate.
Notify the editor of any suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, data fabrication, falsification, or other potential research misconduct.
Refrain from making personal, discriminatory, or offensive comments about the authors.
Avoid using information obtained through peer review for personal, academic, financial, or professional advantage.
Manuscripts submitted to JPII must be treated as confidential documents throughout the review process. Reviewers must not disclose manuscript content, review reports, editorial correspondence, or information about editorial decisions to unauthorized individuals.
Reviewers must not share, reproduce, distribute, or otherwise use unpublished information contained in a manuscript without prior authorization from the editor and, where applicable, the authors.
Reviewers must not contact authors directly regarding a manuscript under review unless explicitly authorized by the editorial team. Any concerns, questions, or requests for clarification should be communicated through the journal's designated editorial channels.
If reviewers wish to consult another expert, they must first obtain permission from the editor and ensure that the confidentiality of the manuscript is maintained.
Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, their evaluation of a manuscript. Conflicts of interest may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, religious, or institutional in nature.
Reviewers should decline an invitation if they have a conflict of interest that could compromise their impartiality. In particular, reviewers should normally decline to review a manuscript if they:
Currently work at the same institution as one or more of the authors in circumstances that could compromise impartiality.
Have been involved in a close supervisory, mentoring, collaborative, or joint-grant relationship with an author within the preceding three years.
Have a direct financial, personal, or professional interest in the research or its outcomes.
Are preparing a substantially similar manuscript or have a closely related manuscript under consideration by another journal, such that the review could create a conflict of interest.
Have any other relationship or circumstance that could reasonably affect their ability to provide an independent assessment.
If reviewers are uncertain whether a particular circumstance constitutes a conflict of interest, they should disclose the situation to the editor before accepting or proceeding with the review. The editor will determine whether the review can continue or whether an alternative reviewer should be appointed.
Reviewers must not accept an invitation solely to gain access to unpublished research without the intention of providing a proper review.
JPII expects reviewers to respond to review invitations within a reasonable period, whether accepting or declining the invitation. Reviewers should accept assignments only when they can complete the assessment within the proposed or mutually agreed deadline.
If unforeseen circumstances prevent a reviewer from completing the review on time, the reviewer must inform the editor as soon as possible and request an extension when necessary.
If a reviewer is unable to undertake a review, they are encouraged to recommend alternative reviewers with relevant expertise. Such recommendations should be based on professional qualifications and subject knowledge, rather than personal relationships or anticipated positive or negative assessments of the manuscript.
Timely communication between reviewers and the editorial team is essential to ensuring an efficient, fair, and consistent editorial process.
Reviewers must provide assessments that are impartial, respectful, and supported by clear academic or technical reasoning. Comments should focus on the quality and content of the manuscript rather than the identity, background, or personal characteristics of the authors.
Reviews should identify the manuscript's strengths and weaknesses and provide practical recommendations for improvement. Where appropriate, reviewers should comment on the relevance of the research question, the adequacy of the methods, the reliability of the results, the validity of the conclusions, the quality of the supporting evidence, and the contribution to engineering practice.
Reviewers should distinguish between major concerns that affect the validity or reliability of the work and minor issues involving presentation, terminology, references, or formatting. Recommendations to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript should be consistent with the evidence and reasoning presented in the review report.
Reviewers are expected to uphold the principles of research integrity and publication ethics. If they identify evidence or reasonable grounds to suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate image manipulation, data fabrication, data falsification, or other forms of research misconduct, they should confidentially notify the editor and provide relevant supporting information.
Reviewers must not conduct independent investigations into suspected misconduct or make public allegations against authors. The editorial team is responsible for assessing the concerns and determining the appropriate course of action in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.
Reviewers must also respect intellectual property rights and avoid requesting citations to their own work or to the work of others unless those references are genuinely relevant and necessary to improve the manuscript.
Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts when using digital tools, including artificial intelligence (AI) applications. Manuscript content, unpublished data, and confidential editorial information must not be uploaded to or disclosed through external AI systems when doing so could violate confidentiality, data protection, or intellectual property requirements.
AI tools must not replace the reviewer's independent professional judgment. Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, originality, and integrity of their review reports. Any use of AI tools must comply with the journal's applicable AI policy and the confidentiality requirements of the peer review process.
The editorial team of JPII is responsible for managing the peer review process and making final editorial decisions. Reviewers provide expert recommendations, but the final decision to accept, request revisions, or reject a manuscript rests with the editor.
Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript's quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, ethical compliance, and the reviewers' recommendations. Editors are expected to handle reviewer reports fairly and confidentially and to address potential conflicts of interest appropriately.
JPII is committed to maintaining a peer review process that promotes transparency, accountability, scientific integrity, and the continuous improvement of engineering knowledge and professional practice.
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.
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...
Crossmark
Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia to maintain the published content published and alert readers to changes if and when they occur.
What is Crossmark?
CrossMark, a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a document. Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians. It attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. Clicking on the CrossMark icon will inform the reader of the document's current status and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.
1. Dimensions
2. Google Scholar
3. Garuda
The publication of scholarly articles in the Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia (JPII) plays an essential role in advancing engineering knowledge, promoting professional development, and maintaining a reliable and credible scholarly record. Peer-reviewed publications reflect the quality and integrity of the work conducted by authors and the institutions that support their research and professional activities. They also contribute to the development and dissemination of scientific knowledge, engineering innovations, and evidence-based professional practices.
JPII is committed to upholding high standards of publication ethics and research integrity. All parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, are expected to adhere to the principles of honesty, transparency, accountability, fairness, confidentiality, and respect for intellectual property.
The Engineering Professional Program (Program Studi Program Profesi Insinyur, PSPPI), Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University (Universitas Diponegoro), as the publisher of JPII, takes its ethical responsibilities throughout the publication process seriously. The journal is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions are based on the scholarly and professional merit of manuscripts and are not influenced by advertising, reprint sales, commercial interests, or other financial considerations.
The editorial board is also committed to cooperating with other journals, publishers, and relevant institutions when necessary to address publication ethics concerns and maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.
The editors of JPII are responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be accepted for publication. Editorial decisions must be based on the manuscript's originality, scientific and technical quality, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, contribution to engineering practice, and compliance with publication ethics requirements.
Editors may consult members of the editorial board and peer reviewers when making decisions. They must also consider applicable legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and other relevant matters.
The final editorial decision must be independent, fair, and supported by the available scholarly evidence and review reports.
Editors must evaluate manuscripts according to their intellectual, scientific, and professional merits, without discrimination based on the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, political views, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics unrelated to the quality of the submission.
All manuscripts must be treated consistently and assessed in accordance with the journal's editorial policies and review procedures.
Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and related editorial correspondence. Information about a manuscript may be disclosed only to the corresponding authors, assigned reviewers, authorized editorial board members, the publisher, or other parties when disclosure is necessary and appropriate for the editorial process.
Unpublished information obtained through manuscript handling must not be used for personal, academic, or professional advantage without the author's explicit written permission.
Editors must avoid handling manuscripts in which they have actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest. Such conflicts may arise from personal relationships, financial interests, professional collaborations, institutional affiliations, or other circumstances that could compromise editorial impartiality.
Where a conflict of interest exists, the manuscript must be assigned to another qualified editor who can manage the review process independently.
Editors must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts in their own research without the author's written consent.
Editors are responsible for responding appropriately to allegations or evidence of research or publication misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and breaches of research ethics.
When concerns arise, editors should assess the available evidence, seek clarification from the relevant parties when appropriate, and follow established procedures to determine the appropriate action. Such action may include requesting revisions, rejecting a manuscript, issuing a correction, publishing an expression of concern, or retracting a published article, depending on the circumstances.
Peer reviewers assist editors in making informed editorial decisions and help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts through constructive and professional feedback. Reviews should assess the originality, technical accuracy, methodological soundness, validity of conclusions, practical relevance, and overall contribution of the submitted work.
Reviewers who feel unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or unable to complete the review within the agreed timeframe must promptly notify the editor and decline the invitation or withdraw from the review process.
Reviewers should communicate any need for an extension as early as possible to avoid unnecessary delays in the editorial process.
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, distribute, or discuss manuscript content with unauthorized individuals unless explicitly permitted by the editor.
Information and ideas obtained during peer review must not be used for personal, academic, financial, or professional advantage.
Reviews must be conducted objectively, impartially, and professionally. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their opinions clearly and support their assessments with relevant evidence and reasoned arguments.
Comments should be constructive and directed toward improving the manuscript's quality, accuracy, clarity, and contribution to engineering knowledge or professional practice.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors when such work is important to the manuscript. Claims that particular observations, methods, findings, or arguments have been reported previously should be supported by appropriate references.
Reviewers must also inform the editor of any substantial similarity, overlap, or potential duplication between the manuscript under consideration and other published works or manuscripts of which they are aware.
Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Such conflicts may arise from competition, collaboration, personal relationships, financial interests, or professional and institutional connections with the authors, organizations, or entities associated with the manuscript.
Reviewers should decline assignments when such conflicts could compromise the independence or fairness of their assessments.
Authors of original research articles must provide accurate, complete, and objective accounts of their work. Research findings should be presented clearly, and the underlying data must be reported accurately.
Manuscripts must contain sufficient methodological detail and appropriate references to enable qualified readers to understand, evaluate, and, where applicable, reproduce the reported work.
Fabrication, falsification, deliberate misrepresentation of results, and the omission or manipulation of evidence intended to mislead readers constitute unacceptable research misconduct.
For engineering case studies and professional practice reports, authors should describe the relevant technical context, methods, engineering decisions, supporting evidence, and outcomes with sufficient detail to allow meaningful professional assessment.
Authors may be requested to provide relevant raw data, supporting documentation, calculations, or other research materials for editorial assessment. Authors should retain research data and supporting records for a reasonable period after publication, in accordance with applicable institutional policies, legal requirements, and disciplinary standards.
Where appropriate and legally permissible, authors are encouraged to make supporting data publicly accessible through suitable repositories. Data sharing must respect confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property rights, contractual obligations, and any applicable ethical restrictions.
Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are original and that all ideas, words, data, figures, tables, methods, and other materials derived from the work of others are properly acknowledged and cited.
Plagiarism includes presenting another person's work or ideas as one's own, copying text without appropriate acknowledgment, and using previously published material without proper attribution. Self-plagiarism and substantial reuse of previously published material without transparent disclosure are also unacceptable when they misrepresent the originality of the submission.
JPII may use plagiarism detection software and other appropriate methods to assess the originality of submitted manuscripts. Suspected cases will be evaluated in accordance with the journal's editorial and publication ethics procedures.
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal or primary publication outlet.
Manuscripts must not contain substantial duplication of previously published work without appropriate disclosure, justification, and citation. Where a submission builds on an earlier publication, authors must clearly explain the relationship between the works and demonstrate the distinct contribution of the new manuscript.
Authors must inform the editor of any closely related manuscripts, reports, conference papers, or publications that could affect the assessment of originality.
Authors must provide appropriate citations for all significant contributions from other researchers, engineers, practitioners, and sources that have influenced the reported work.
Relevant prior publications, technical standards, regulations, professional guidelines, datasets, and other supporting materials must be acknowledged where appropriate. References should be accurate, relevant, and sufficient to support the claims made in the manuscript.
Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual or professional contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the work, or other contributions that satisfy the journal's authorship criteria.
All individuals who meet the authorship criteria should be included as authors, while individuals who have made meaningful but non-author-level contributions should be appropriately acknowledged or identified as contributors.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all eligible authors are listed, that no ineligible individuals are included as authors, and that all authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission to JPII.
Any changes to authorship after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors, subject to the editor's review.
Authors must clearly identify any unusual hazards associated with chemicals, materials, procedures, equipment, or engineering operations described in their manuscripts. Relevant safety precautions, risk controls, and applicable technical or regulatory requirements should be reported where appropriate.
Research involving human participants, identifiable personal information, or animals must comply with applicable ethical requirements and institutional regulations. Where required, authors must obtain approval from the appropriate ethics committee and provide the relevant approval information in the manuscript.
Authors must also ensure that necessary permissions have been obtained for the use of confidential information, personal data, photographs, or other materials that require authorization.
All authors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research, engineering work, interpretation of results, or conclusions presented in the manuscript.
All sources of financial support, including research grants, institutional funding, industrial sponsorship, and other relevant forms of assistance, must be acknowledged.
Authors should also disclose the role of sponsors or funders in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and decision to submit the work for publication, where applicable.
Authors must use artificial intelligence (AI) tools responsibly and transparently in preparing manuscripts. AI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and accountability of scholarly work.
Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, factual accuracy, references, data, analyses, and conclusions presented in their manuscripts. AI tools must not be used to fabricate or falsify data, generate misleading results, invent references, or misrepresent research activities.
Any use of AI that falls within the journal's disclosure requirements must be appropriately acknowledged in accordance with JPII's applicable AI policy. Authors must also ensure that the use of AI does not infringe confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property rights, or research ethics requirements.
If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate in determining the appropriate corrective action.
Depending on the nature and severity of the error, the journal may publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, or retract the article. Authors are expected to cooperate fully in preserving the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record.
PSPPI, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University, as the publisher of JPII, is committed to supporting the editorial team in maintaining publication ethics and scholarly integrity.
The publisher must respect the independence of editorial decisions and ensure that such decisions are not improperly influenced by commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, or other external pressures.
The publisher is expected to provide appropriate support for investigating suspected publication misconduct, issuing corrections when necessary, and maintaining the accuracy and integrity of published content.
The publisher and editorial team should cooperate with relevant institutions, other journals, and scholarly organizations when necessary to address ethical concerns and protect the scholarly record.
JPII takes allegations of publication misconduct seriously. Potential violations include, but are not limited to:
Plagiarism and inappropriate reuse of published material.
Fabrication or falsification of data and research findings.
Duplicate or redundant publication.
Inappropriate authorship or undisclosed changes in authorship.
Undisclosed conflicts of interest.
Manipulation of peer review or reviewer identity.
Misrepresentation of research methods, results, or professional activities.
Breaches of confidentiality or applicable research ethics requirements.
When a concern is raised, the editorial team will assess the available evidence and may request explanations or supporting documents from the relevant parties. Authors and reviewers are expected to cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries.
Appropriate action will be determined according to the nature, seriousness, and available evidence concerning the alleged misconduct. Where necessary, JPII may reject a submission, suspend editorial processing, publish a correction, issue an expression of concern, retract a published article, or notify the relevant institution or organization, subject to applicable procedures and requirements.
All allegations should be handled fairly, confidentially, and without prejudgment.
JPII is committed to maintaining a publication process that upholds honesty, transparency, accountability, fairness, and professional responsibility. Authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher share responsibility for protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.
Through the consistent implementation of this Publication Ethics policy, JPII seeks to promote trustworthy research, responsible engineering practice, and the dissemination of high-quality scholarly and professional contributions that benefit the engineering community and society.
Original Article: [Full article citation and DOI]
Authors: [Author names]
Retraction Date: [Date]
The editorial team of Jurnal Profesi Insinyur Indonesia (JPII) hereby retracts the article entitled "[Original Article Title]" by [Author Names], published in [Volume, Issue, Year].
This decision follows an assessment of [briefly identify the verified issue, such as unreliable data, a major methodological error, plagiarism, or a serious publication ethics violation].
The evidence indicates that [provide a concise, factual explanation of the problem and its effect on the article's findings, conclusions, or publication integrity].
The decision to retract the article was made by the editorial authority of JPII following consideration of the available evidence and the responses received from the relevant parties, where applicable.
This retraction is intended to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. It does not, by itself, imply that every author acted deliberately or dishonestly.
The original article will remain accessible where legally and ethically appropriate and will be clearly marked as RETRACTED. This notice is permanently linked to the original publication.
Issued by: The Editorial Team of JPII.
Alamat Kontak:
Program Studi Program Profesi Insinyur Fakultas Teknik Universitas Diponegoro
Gedung Dekanat Baru Lt 3. Prof. Sudarto SH Tembalang Semarang 50275
www.psppi.ft.undip.ac.id
