Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil (POTENSI) or Journal of Civil Engineering Project encompasses original research articles, review articles, and case studies, including:
Manuscripts submitted to Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil (POTENSI) or Journal of Civil Engineering Project will be evaluated for publication through 2 review stages, those are pre-review and substance review.The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by the editor of the journal and will be evaluated the conformity of the manuscript with the focus and scope of the journal as well as with the author guideline. POTENSI uses Google Scholar and Turnitin software for plagiarism and similarity checking during this stage. Duration of evaluation between 1-3 weeks.
Each submitted manuscript that passes the first stage will be substantial single-blind reviewed by at least two reviewers. Duration of evaluation between 3-16 weeks after review assignment. If desired, the reviewer may request a re-review after the author revises his/her article. Reviewers' comments will be sent to corresponding author to take the necessary actions and revise.
The Editor in Chief authorizes the decision of whether the revised manuscript can be published by considering recommendations from reviewers. All pre-published articles must be free from plagiarism content. Editors will check the similarity of articles in this journal using Turnitin software.
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.
Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil (POTENSI) or Journal of Civil Engineering Project is scheduled for publication in March and September (2 issues a year).
Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil (POTENSI) or Journal of Civil Engineering Project is a peer-reviewed electronic journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior 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 (Diponegoro University). 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 POTENSI journal 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 behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.
Diponegoro University as publisher of POTENSI 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, the Department of Civil Engineering and Design of Diponegoro University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
The editor of the POTENSI journal 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.
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
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
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
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.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that 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.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
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.
Data Access and Retention
Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. The author should also prepare 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.
Originality and Plagiarism
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.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
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 acknowledgement 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 of the Paper
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.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
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.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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.
Fundamental errors in published works
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.
Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil (POTENSI) or Journal of Civil Engineering Project to maintain the 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 Proyek Teknik Sipil recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and 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 current status of a document and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.
Jurnal Proyek Teknik Sipil is indexed in: