ABOUT THIS JOURNAL
FOR AUTHOR
ISSN
Tataloka is a scholarly publication forum focusing on the planning, arrangement, and management of spaces and places. The name Tataloka is derived from tata, meaning arrangement, organization, or management, and loka, referring to location or space.
Jurnal Tataloka welcomes research articles and scholarly studies addressing various aspects of the planning, arrangement, utilization, management, and development of spaces and places in urban, rural, and regional contexts, as well as related issues that contribute to the advancement of urban and regional planning knowledge.
Every manuscript submitted to Tataloka will be peer reviewed by two referees/reviewers. The mechanism is double blind. The manuscript will be made anonym for the reviewers, and so are the reviewers for the author/s. The final decision is made by the editorial board based on the review results.
Tataloka a scientific journal in the field of planning, development, and urban and regional development. Published every 3 months in February, May, August, and November
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.
All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download. We are continuously working with our author communities to select the best choice of license options, currently being defined for this journal as follows:• Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA)
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.
Tataloka is a peer-reviewed journal published by Universitas Diponegoro Publishing Group. This statement clarifies 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. 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 Tataloka 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.
Universitas Diponegoro Publishing Group as publisher of Tataloka 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, Universitas Diponegoro Publishing Group and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Publication Decisions
The editor of the Tataloka 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.
Complaints and Appeals
Tataloka will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to a respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline. The complaint cases should be sent by email to: tataloka@live.undip.ac.id.
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
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.
Promptness
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 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.
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
Reporting Standards
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, 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.
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 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 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.
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.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
The team at TATALOKA is working constantly to increase the visibility and dissemination or the journal's scientific content. This website will be updated regularly to provide up-to-date information on the databases, summaries and portals that index the content of the TATALOKA.
Indexed in:
This policy establishes guidelines for the responsible use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Large Language Models (LLMs) and AI-assisted tools, in the publication process at Jurnal Tataloka. The use of these tools must uphold academic integrity, transparency, originality, confidentiality, and research ethics. Authors, peer reviewers, and editors are responsible for ensuring that AI is used appropriately within their respective roles and does not replace human judgment or accountability for scholarly work.
1. Guidelines for Authors
Authors may use Generative AI to improve language, grammar, clarity, and manuscript structure. However, AI must not replace authors' intellectual contributions or be used to fabricate, falsify, or misleadingly manipulate research data, findings, maps, figures, tables, or other research evidence. Authors must disclose the use of AI during manuscript preparation at the initial submission, including its purpose and extent. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and scientific integrity of their manuscripts, and all AI-generated information, references, data, and claims must be verified before submission. AI tools cannot be listed as authors or contributors. The use of AI to create or modify figures and other visual materials must also be disclosed and must not misrepresent research findings.
2. Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
Peer reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, unpublished data, and other materials obtained through the review process. Such materials must not be uploaded to Generative AI tools if doing so could compromise confidentiality or data security. Review reports and recommendations must reflect reviewers' own expertise and independent judgment and must not be generated by AI. AI may be used to improve the language of reviewers' own comments, provided that confidential manuscript content is not shared with AI tools. Any suspected misuse of AI or other research integrity concerns must be reported confidentially to the editor.
3. Guidelines for Editors
Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence when using AI tools. Editorial decisions, including manuscript screening and acceptance or rejection, must remain under human responsibility and must not be delegated to AI. AI may support administrative tasks, provided that confidentiality is maintained and editorial independence is preserved. AI-detection results must not serve as the sole basis for editorial decisions. Suspected misuse of AI must be assessed fairly and in accordance with relevant publication ethics guidelines, including recommendations from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), where applicable.
Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, and plagiarism in conducting or reviewing research, writing articles, or reporting research results. When research misconduct or other serious irregularities are identified in a published article, the Editors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.
In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will follow the best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to investigate allegations and address them fairly. Manuscripts found to contain research misconduct will be rejected. If misconduct is identified in a published article, the journal may issue a correction or retract the article, depending on the nature and severity of the issue.
The initial step involves assessing the validity of the allegation and determining whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct. This assessment also includes identifying any relevant conflicts of interest involving the individuals making the allegation.
If scientific misconduct or other substantial research irregularities are suspected, the corresponding author will be informed and asked to provide a detailed response on behalf of all co-authors. After evaluating the response, the Editors may seek further review or consult relevant experts, such as statistical reviewers. If misconduct is not established but concerns remain regarding the article, clarification, additional analysis, or a correction notice may be sufficient to address the issue.
The journal expects relevant institutions to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Authors, journals, and institutions share responsibility for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.
Tataloka is committed to correcting the scholarly record when errors or concerns are identified. If errors in a published article do not invalidate its main findings, the journal may publish a correction notice. However, if serious errors, research misconduct, plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, or other issues undermine the reliability of an article's findings, the journal may retract the article in accordance with COPE guidelines. All corrections and retractions will be clearly identified and linked to the original article to ensure transparency and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.
Tataloka accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by reader. In case the reader giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and correction will be published in next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.
