Author guidlines

Introduction

E-Amal: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, with registered number ISSN (print) 2774-8316 |- ISSN (online) 2775-0302 is a scientific multidisciplinary journal published by LP2M STP Mataram. It is at the national level that covers lot of common problems or issues related to the public administration sciences. The aim of this journal publication is to disseminate the conceptual thoughts or ideas and research results that have been achieved in the area of community services.

Online E-amal: JurnalPengabdian kepada Masyarakat was available since 25 Januari 2021 or since the release of Volume 1, Number 1, Year 2021. This journal was indexed in Indonesian Scientific Journal Database (ISJD), Indonesia Publication Index (IPI) and Google Scholar. The E-amal: JurnalPengabdian kepada Masyarakat editorial board invites you to submit your manuscript to be published in this journal.

Online Submission Procedure

By submitting to E-amal, authors attest that:

The submission is an original work, free from any form of plagiarism (text, data, and figures).
The submission has not been previously published, nor is it under consideration by another journal.
The submission has been approved by all co-authors and relevant authorities (e.g. an institution or sponsor).
The manuscript has been (to the best of the authors’ abilities) written in good English or Bahasa Indonesia and is free of grammatical errors. However, it is highly recommended to submit the manuscript in English. It has been checked with a proofreading tool (e.g. Grammarly) and, if possible, proofreaded by a language editor.

Submissions to E-amal should be through its online submission system. There are no strict formatting requirements for the initial submission, as long as the article structure conforms with our guidelines (see the manuscript structure section below). Manuscripts that advance to the revision stage will then be required to be formatted appropriately (see the formatting section). This enables authors to focus on the scientific content of their manuscript, along with speeding up the article’s processing time.

Author registration. Authors without an E-amal account are required to create an account before beginning their submission. Make sure that the “Author” role is selected in the Role dropdown menu, otherwise you will not be able to proceed with the submission.

Author(s) data. The submitting author is required to complete the author(s) data during the submis- sion. Please ensure that the affiliation addresses are complete and written exactly as they appear on the manuscript.

Manuscript metadata. Please complete at least the following information related to the manuscript:

Title: Fill in the manuscript title field in sentence case.

Abstract: Paste the abstract into the abstract field; make sure that the formatting is consistent with the manuscript (e.g. superscript and italics).

Keywords: Provide a maximum of six words/phrases, separated by semicolons.

References: References should be written in accordance with the APA (JPkM’s chosen reference style), but with the journal name written in full (not abbreviated). Separate each individual reference with a blank line.

Cover letter. In addition to the manuscript and its supplemental files, include a succinct cover letter stating the significance of the study and novelty of the results, as well as how it will appeal to JPkM’s readership. Authors may optionally suggest two potential reviewers from different institution for their manuscript, with whom no conflicts of interest exist.

Title page. Contain manuscript title, followed by author name(s), affiliation, and correspondence e-mail.

Appendix. Any supplemental files such as questionnaire and other supporting data not more than 3 pages.

Manuscript Structures

Title. Use a concise and informative title in sentence case, with a maximum of 16 words.

Affiliation. Provide the full postal address of each author’s affiliation, including the street name and number, city, ZIP code, and country.

Abstract. Should consist of a single paragraph of no more than 200 words. Provide the background and objective of the paper, its principal results, and its conclusions. Avoid using abbreviations and citations.

Keywords. Include a maximum of six keywords or phrases, arranged alphabetically and separated using semicolons (;). Use specific, relevant terms that do not appear in the title, so that the article is easier to find in search engines. Do not use terms that are too general or too long.

Introduction. This section should briefly explain the background of the study, provide a short review of the pertinent literature, state the originality of the research, and state the research objectives. This section also covers the factual and actual problems, challenges, or requirements needed by community which related to the research purposes.

Literature or conceptual review. A literature review is both a summary and explanation of the complete and current state of knowledge on a limited topic as found in academic books and journal articles. A conceptual analysis would only include reference to those works that are necessary for the analysis (although subjectively omitting works that may run counter to the analysis is not acceptable in a scientific work).

Research design. Combine the methods and procedure used into one narrative passage. Enough information should be provided to enable repetition of the research. For commercial sources of the materials, the name of the company, and the town and country in which they are located should be indicated. Methods already published should be indicated by a reference, with only the relevant modifications described here; e.g. “Powder solubility was evaluated according to the method proposed by Smith (2000), with modifications. In the case of this study, powders were stirred in 25 mL of distilled water for 5 min using a blender.”; or “The powder solubility test followed the method of Smith (2000), with modifications in water volume. Powders were stirred in 25 mL of distilled water for 5 min using a blender.”

Results. Describe the outcome of the study. Data should be presented as concisely as possible, and in the form of tables or figures if appropriate, although very large tables should be avoided. If needed, this section can be combined with the Discussion section into a Results and discussion section.

Discussion. This section should be an interpretation of the results of the work (not a repetition of them) in the context of previous research. Avoid excessive referencing of published literature. If needed, this section can be combined with the Results section into a Results and discussion section.

Conclusions. The main conclusions of the study may be presented in a standalone Conclusions section or included as a subsection of the Discussion section.

Acknowledgments. Acknowledge anyone who contributed to the research, as well as any funding or grants received in support of it. The names of funding organizations should be written in full, along with the grant numbers, if available. List any individuals who helped you during the study (e.g. assistance with study design or analysis, or guidance through a study area), or writing of the article (e.g. providing advice on the language, editing, or proofreading the article).

Competing interests. Declare any competing interests, such as any financial, professional, or personal relationships that are relevant to the submitted work. This can include the name of a funding source and a description of their role in the design of the study, data collection and analysis, writing of the article, and/or decision to submit the manuscript to JPkM; whether they serve or have previously served on JPkM’s editorial board; and/or whether they work or have worked for an organization that may benefit from the publication of the article.

References. List all items alphabetically. Literature cited during the construction of the paper are included in the bibliography. For the purposes of efficiency and conciseness, avoid using more than 40 references and less than 10, consist of 70% journal references and 30% book references. Journal references should be at least 5 recent years, while book references. JPkM uses an APA 6^th Edition (American Psychological Association) format.

Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to JPkM undergo a rigorous screening and review process to ensure that they fit into the journal’s scope and are of sufficient academic quality and novelty to appeal to E-amal's scholarly and readership.

Desk review. Desk review is done based on the minimum writing adequacy as refer to E-amal's author guideline such as minimum word numbers, update and reliability references, plagiarism, and sufficient body of manuscript (e.g. title, abstract, introduction, etc.). Plagiarism screening will be done using turnitin. Manuscripts that fail to pass the desk review will be rejected without further review.

Initial manuscript evaluation. If the manuscript passes the desk review, it will be assigned to Editor-in-Chief and/or Managing Editor, who will then send it to the double-blind peer-review process. Manuscripts that fail to pass this process will also be rejected without further review.

Double-blind peer-review. If the manuscript passes the initial manuscript evaluation, it will be assigned to at least one expert in the relevant field to undergo a double-blind peer-review, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process. Manuscripts on this process will received the first decision.

First decision. A decision on a peer-reviewed manuscript will only be made upon the receipt of double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process. At this stage, a manuscript can either be (1) rejected; (2) asked for revisions (minor or major); (3) accepted as is; (4) or (if significant changes to the language or content are required) recommended for resubmission for a second review process. The final decision to accept the manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief and/or based on the recommendation by the board of editors.

How the referee is selected?

Whenever possible, referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise and our database is constantly being updated.

Referee reports

Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: (1) is original; (2) is methodologically sound; (3) follows appropriate ethical guidelines; (4) sufficient scientific analysis & discussion has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions; (5) correctly & updated references previous relevant work; and (6) clear flow of writing and/or visualization of concept.

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but referees may, if so wish, suggest corrections to the manuscript.

Revision stage. A manuscript that requires minor or major revisions will be returned to the submitting author, who will have up to three weeks to format and revise the manuscript, following which it will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or Managing Editor. The Editor-in-Chief and/or Managing Editor will determine whether the changes are adequate and appropriate, as well as whether the author(s) sufficiently responded to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. If the revisions are deemed to be inadequate, this cycle will be repeated (the manuscript will be returned to the submitting author once more for further revision) or rejected.

Final decision. A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees. If the author(s) are unable to make the required changes or have done so to a degree below JPkM’s standards, the manuscript will be rejected.

Editor’s decision is final. Referees and/or board of editor advise the Editor-in-Chief, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

Copyediting and typesetting. If the manuscript is accepted, it will go through a final round of editing and proofreading by an in-house language editor, following which it will be typeset and returned to the submitting author for final approval. All authors must approve this final version of the article before it can be officially published.

Manuscript Processing Time

The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee’s reports is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. The Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript.

Language Editing

Authors whose first language is not English (and many times even those for whom it is) will greatly increase the chance of their article being published if it is checked by a language editor or native speaker prior to its submission. A well-written manuscript enables editors and reviewers to accurately assess the content of the manuscript, thus accelerating the reviewing process. It also ensures that the scientific merit of the research can be fully conveyed to readers. E-amal also provide language editing and translation services for additional cost (optional).