- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process/Policy
- Publication Frequency
- Open Access Policy
- About The Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food (Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan)
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements
- Duties of Editorial Board
- Duties of Reviewers
- Duties of authors
FOCUS AND SCOPE
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is a scientific journal that publishes various original research articles and reviews (by invitation) about nutrition and food, related to aspects of biochemistry, clinical nutrition, community nutrition, functional foods, and socio-economy, including nutrition and food information and regulation. This journal is an official publication of Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Human Ecology, IPB University, and PERGIZI PANGAN Indonesia, published since 2006. It is published regularly 3 (three) times a year (in March, July, and November).
|Open Submissions||Indexed||Peer Reviewed|
PEER REVIEW PROCESS/POLICY
The suitability of manuscripts for publication in Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is judged by peer reviewers and the editorial board. All the review processes are conducted in a blind review. The Technical Editor handles all correspondence with the author. The Chief Editor and Section Editors make the final decision as to whether the paper is recommended for acceptance, rejection, or needs to be returned to the author for revision.
Chief Editor and Technical Editors will evaluate the submitted papers on a prequalification step for suitability of further review process. The manuscripts will be evaluated by one or two reviewers selected by Chief Editor and Technical Editors. The peer reviewers should examine the manuscript and return it with their recommendation to the Chief Editor or Technical Editors as soon as possible, usually within 3 weeks. If one of the peer reviewers recommends rejection, the Chief Editor will ask a third reviewer or Technical Editors to decide the acceptance or rejection of the paper.
Papers needing revision will be returned to the authors, and the author must return the revised manuscript to the Technical Editor via OJS of Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food). Technical Editors check whether the manuscript is revised as suggested by peer reviewers. Technical Editors could give recommendations to Chief Editor that the manuscript should return to authors, accept, or reject within 2 weeks. After acceptance by Technical Editors, manuscript is forwarded to the layout editor to be layout for the editorial board meeting. Chief Editor would send an acceptance letter announcing the publication issue attached with manuscript reprint to authors.
There are three steps of the revision process by authors: 1) revision manuscript to accommodate peer reviewer suggestions within 2-4 weeks; 2) revision to accommodate Technical Editors suggestions within 2-4 weeks (if any), and 3) revision to accommodate editorial meeting suggestions within 1 week (if any). Manuscripts that exceed the revision deadline will be withdrawn. Authors may request for an extension to Chief Editor before the revision expires. The time interval from the date the manuscript is submitted to the acceptance for publication varies, depending on the time required for review and revision.
Manuscripts are rejected usually for 3 general reasons: 1) The topic of the manuscript does not fit in the journal scope and may be better suited for publication elsewhere. 2) The substance of the manuscripts do not meet Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) standards; the data may be incomplete; the methodology used is not appropriate; lack of novelties and no advancement of the existing knowledge; or there are no consistency among objectives, research design/method, evidence, and conclusion. 3) Manuscript are not written in English and not following Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) guidelines in Instruction to Authors. These manuscripts may be rejected without a review process. Manuscripts could also be rejected in the review process if Authors do not revise the manuscripts as suggested by reviewers and editorial board, also do not give response/rebuttal against the suggestions.
If a manuscript is rejected, the author will be notified by Chief Editor with a statement of reasons for rejection. The author may appeal to Chief Editor if he or she believes an unfair judgment has been made which enclose the author’s reasons. Chief Editor will review and discuss the reasons with Technical Editors responsible for the manuscript, and later decide whether to accept or deny the appeal.
Reprints of all manuscripts will be provided to the corresponding author. The reprints should be read carefully, checked against the typed manuscript, and the corrections may be returned soon. Authors submitting manuscripts should understand and agree that the copyright of manuscripts published is held by Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan. The statement to release the copyright to Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is stated in Form A1. Copyright encompasses exclusive rights to reproduce, distribute, and sell any part of the journal articles in all forms and media. The reproduction of any part of this journal, its storage in databases, and its transmission by any form or media will be allowed only with written permission from Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan.
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) publishes 3 (three) times per year (March, July, and November) since its' July 2006 edition. Kindly visit this link for the list of those articles that have been published: https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jgizipangan/issue/archive
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. All articles published Open Access will be immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.
ABOUT THE INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF NUTRITION AND FOOD (JURNAL GIZI DAN PANGAN)
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is an official publication of Food and Nutrition Society of Indonesia (PERGIZI PANGAN Indonesia) and Department of Community Nutrition, IPB University, since 2006.
This journal is an open access scientific journal that publishes original research articles in the area of nutrition and food, covering the aspects of biochemistry, clinical nutrition, community nutrition, functional foods, and socio-economic aspects of nutrition and food, including nutrition and food database and regulations.
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is accredited by The National Journal Accreditation (ARJUNA) managed by the Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education, Republic of Indonesia (current position: 2nd tier of Sinta). It is also indexed in Clarivate Analytics, Emerging Sources Citation Index, SINTA (Science and Technology Index), DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journal), EuroPub, Dimensions, and Google Scholar.
For the publication, the journal is published regularly three times a year (March, July, and November) and fully in English with an active DOI number on each article.
Official Website of Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan: https://jurnal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jgizipangan
Online Submission: https://journal.ipb.ac.id/index.php/jgizipangan/user/register?source=
PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENTS
A publication ethics and malpractice statement (composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations)
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication (These guidelines are based on Elsevier policies)
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) is a peer-reviewed journal publishing articles to develop a coherent and respected network of nutrition and food knowledge. It is 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.
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.
In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.
The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.
If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the co-authors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.
Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.
DUTIES OF EDITORIAL BOARD (These guidelines are based on Elsevier policies and COPEís Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)
The editor of a peer-reviewed Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) 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 editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Complaints and Appeals
Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan (Indonesian Journal of Nutrition and Food) 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 guidelines. The complaint cases should be sent by email to: email@example.com
An editor should evaluate 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS (These guidelines are based on Elsevier policies and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors).
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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
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.
Acknowledgment 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