Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

UKaRsT promotes research in the field of civil engineering. Contributions are expected from scientists, educators, senior researchers, research administrators, and students at an advanced stage of their research. An article to be published on UKaRsT goes through a rigorous review process.

The editorial contents and elements that comprise the journal include Theoretical articles, Empirical studies, Case studies, Systematic Literature Review.

The editorial board welcomes innovative manuscripts from Civil Engineering field. The scopes of this journal are

  • Geotechnical
  • Building Structure
  • Bridge Structure
  • Airport Structure
  • Foundation Structure
  • Material Research
  • Management Project
  • Occupational Health And Safety
  • Transportation
  • Geometric Roads
  • Water Building
  • Geographic Information System

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Every manuscript that goes assessed by the following rules:

  • The authenticity of its contribution to the field of scientific publishing, methodological and theoretical reliability is taken in accordance with topics, coherence analysis, grammar and writing in accordance with existing rules.
  • Each manuscript submitted by the author, will do peer review
  • Each article will be reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers.
  • The article will be accepted at least recommended by two reviewers and with permission from the editor.
  • The principle of recruitment of reviewers has at least written scientific journals as the first author, or a member of the author on three of articles, both publications of accredited national-scale scientific journals and international-scale scientific journal publications.
  • Any incoming paper will be checked by the section editor, if it does not match the scope of the U Karst, it will be returned for rejection, so if there are things that do not match the regularized style of U Karst, then the paper will be returned to the author, if it is appropriate With a regularized style of U Karst, it will be assigned to reviewers.
  • The process of reviewing a paper using a double blind method involving a minimum of two reviewers who have been selected by a section editor, if between reviewers there are conflicting decisions, it will be additional reviewers to decide whether the article is accepted or rejected.

 

 

Publication Frequency

This journal will be published two times a year: April and October. Every issue consist of 10 articles and therefor every volume has 20 articles/reviews.

 

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.

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

 

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...

 

Submission Guidelines

The document should be submitted by Online Submission System in U Karst portal.

  1. Firstly, the author without a U Karst account is required to create an account before beginning their submission. Make sure that the "Author" role is selected in the role checkbox menu, otherwise, you will not be able to proceed with the submission.
  2. After the registration step is completed, log in as an author, click on “New Submission”. The article submission stage consists of five stages, such as: (1). Start, (2). Upload Submission, (3). Enter Metadata, (4). Upload Supplementary Files, (5). Confirmation.
  3. In the “Start” column, chose the Journal Section (Full Article), check all the checklists.
  4. In the “Upload Submission” Columns, upload the manuscript files in MS Word format in this column.
  5. In the “Enter Metadata” columns, fill in with all the author data and affiliation. Including the Journal Title, Abstract, and Indexing Keywords.
  6. In the “Upload Supplementary Files” columns, the author is allowed to upload supplementary files, publication right form, paper structure, or any other else.
  7. In the “Confirmation” columns, if the data you entered are all correct already, then click “Finish Submission”.
  8. If the author has difficulties in the submission process through the online system, please contact U Karst editorial team at ukarst@unik-kediri.ac.id or WhatsApp at 082233477349 (Dwifi Aprillia Karisma)

 

Guidellines For Journal Publication

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT
(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)


Ethical guidelines for journal publication
--------------------------------------------

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals published by Universitas Kadiri is process of permanent knowledge improvement. 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 of society-owned or sponsored journals.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.


DUTIES OF AUTHORS
(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

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 behavior and are unacceptable". Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.


Data access and retention
------------------------------

Authors may be 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, 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. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.


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. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

 

Acknowledgement of sources
--------------------------------

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. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.


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 ( so its mean that manuscript at least have author and co author). 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. 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 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. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.


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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.


DUTIES OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD
(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Publication decisions
------------------------

The editor of a peer-reviewed JIJICT 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.


Fair play
-----------

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.


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. 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 member 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
(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) 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.


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.


Confidentiality
----------------

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
------------------------------------

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer'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. 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.

 

CrossMark Policy

Crossmark is a multi-publisher initiative from Crossref to provide a standard way for readers to find the latest version of the content. By implementing the Crossmark logo (Kadiri University of Kediri), it is committed to maintaining the content it publishes and to remind readers of changes if and when they occur. Clicking on the Crossmark logo will let you know the current status of the document and can also provide you with additional publication notes about the document.

 

Retraction

The papers published in the U KaRsT will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research
The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.