Widya Bhumi

Widya Bhumi recognizes and is dedicated to promoting ethical publishing practices. Editor Widya Bhumi entrusts peer reviewers with the confidential and effective evaluation of manuscripts, and readers place their trust in the peer-review process. The right editorial decisions will promote an effective and efficient publishing system, which will benefit the scientific/user community, editors, authors, researchers, research sponsors, readers, and publishers in general.

 

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Allegations of misconduct 

Each writer at Widya Bhumi submits a manuscript as a result of research/case study/empirical study that is presented in a precise, objective manner and provides significant results. The information provided must be correct. Manuscripts must be written in detail, contain adequate references, and be replicated or referred to by other parties. Presenting false statements is unethical and unacceptable.

 

Authorship and contributorship 

Widya Bhumi's authorship and contributors policy is limited to parties who make significant contributions to the manuscript, including concept, design, implementation, and interpretation of research results. All parties who have made significant contributions must be identified as co-author(s), while other parties who have contributed and/or participated in some of the research project's substance must be recognized as contributors. The author is responsible for identifying and determining the contribution of each party involved in the research, as well as the level of their contribution to the overall manuscript. All authors must be notified of the final version of the manuscript and agree to its publication.   

 

Originality and plagiarism

The originality of the manuscript is the responsibility of all authors. Quotations must be written in accordance with Widya Bhumi's specifications. It is prohibited to quote, duplicate, copy, or paraphrase part or all of the content of other works without mentioning references or claiming the work of third parties.  

 

Conflicts of interest

To avoid conflicts of interest, all manuscripts with a potential conflict of interest, whether on the source of funding or potential misinterpretation of the manuscript, must be mentioned by the author. If any of the following conditions are met, the editor has the authority to make a decision on the manuscript.  

 

Data and reproducibility

During the review process, the editor may ask the author for reference data. In this case, the author must supply the requested information.  

 

Ethical Supervision

The author has given permission to publish all manuscripts published by Widya Bhumi. If the manuscript contains research involving human subjects, the author must ensure that the manuscript is accompanied by a statement stating that all processes and procedures were carried out in accordance with relevant institutional laws and guidelines or in accordance with an authorized institutional committee.  

    

Post-Publication Modification

When an author discovers fundamental and significant errors in a published manuscript, he or she must notify the editor of the journal or publisher and, together with the editor, withdraw or revise the manuscript. If the editor discovers errors from third parties, the author must withdraw the manuscript through the editor, revise the manuscript, and provide evidence that the manuscript is valid and original.  

 

Intellectual Right and Redundant 

The author retains the copyright for Widya Bhumi articles, which are freely accessible online. Publishers have the authority to publish it in other channels, hardcopy or softcopy, as necessary. Authors are not permitted to republish the same article in any form in any other publisher. Submitting the same article to multiple journals at the same time is also considered unethical and unacceptable. Widya Bhumi publication is free of charge, and the publisher bears all costs associated with the publication process.  

 

Journal Management 

The Widya Bhumi journal is funded by the Indonesian National Budget (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara), and the publisher does not charge the author any fees. All processes at Widya Bhumi are professionally managed, and publications are managed using the OJS system. Widya Bhumi regularly conducts management, editorial, and editorial staff training to maintain management quality. Widya Bhumi ensures that all publication processes are carried out independently.  

 

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Reviewer Guidelines

The documents submitted to Widya Bhumi are rigorously peer-reviewed to ensure that they fit within the scope of the journal and are sufficient in terms of academic quality and novelty. This standard must be followed by all reviewers. Reviewers have responsibilities as reviewers, as well as ethical obligations to both the journal and the authors.

 

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are responsible for reading the manuscript and determining its suitability and scientific quality for publication in Widya Bhumi. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, unbiased, unambiguous, and honest feedback to authors in order to encourage them to improve their manuscript.

Widya Bhumi journal intends to review all manuscripts submitted, regardless of whether they will be accepted or should be improved. Reviews should be critical but not destructive, and they must be based on accurate scientific communication.

 

Considerations before reviewing the manuscript

The reviewer must ensure that he or she has the necessary expertise and time to provide a critical evaluation of the manuscript. Reviewers must ensure that the manuscript corresponds to their area of expertise. The review should take two to four weeks. If the reviewer believes they will be unable to complete the review within the allotted time, they must notify the editor and request more time. Reviewers may not have a conflict of interest with the manuscript under consideration. If this is the case, the reviewer should contact the editor and resign immediately.

 

Reviewer ethics 

Widya Bhumi relies on the impartiality and discretion of the reviewers, and as a reviewer, he/she was entrusted with confidential material intended solely for evaluation. As a result, we expect the reviewer to handle all documents and correspondence related to the review process with the utmost care.

Use none of the information contained therein to further your own research or to discredit another party.

Do not discuss any aspect of the manuscript with a third party. Ensure that the information contained therein, as well as the details of the review process, remain confidential before, during, and after publication. Keep the blind review process's integrity. Under no circumstances should you contact any of the authors to discuss their manuscript. In your evaluation of the manuscript, be fair, honest, and objective.

Declare a conflict of interest and immediately recuse yourself if you believe your impartiality has been jeopardized.

 

Conducting the review

The Widya Bhumi review process employs an online submission and peer review system. When a reviewer is asked to review a paper submitted to Widya Bhumi, a journal account is created for them so that they can read the abstract and decide whether or not to review it.

If the reviewer has been asked to review a paper, simply log into the reviewer account, read the provided abstract, and indicate whether the reviewer agrees to review it. If the reviewer declines to review the manuscript, please explain why and, if possible, suggest an alternate reviewer from a similar field.

To ensure the integrity of the peer-review process, all future correspondence will go through this system, with the reviewer having access to the full text. Reviewers may also make direct comments on manuscript files, but they must be anonymous and focus on the content of the article rather than its layout or formatting.

 

Principal criteria

A good review considers the manuscript's overall quality as well as the accuracy and validity of its details. The latter informs the former. Consider the following factors when evaluating a manuscript for Widya Bhumi:: 

1. Is the manuscript within Widya Bhumi's purview? How interesting will the article be to the journal's readers?
2. The research's originality. Is the article unique and interesting enough? Is it a source of new information? How original is the research?
3. The title is appropriate. Is the title accurate in describing the content?
4. The standard of the content. Is the article in accordance with Widya Bhumi standards? Are the research questions significant? Does the manuscript contribute to the expansion or advancement of current research in its field?
5. Is the methodology's description informative, clear, and concise? Is the research methodology precise and well-executed? How appropriate is the approach or experimental design?
6. The importance of the findings. Are the findings significant for agrarian and land studies, as well as society?
7. Tables, figures, and/or supplemental material are appropriate. Is every figure/table required and properly described? Is the supplemental material relevant to the content?
8. The data's completeness. How complete is the information?
9. The discussion's significance. Is the debate pertinent to the results and the rest of the content? Have the authors discussed their findings in the context of previous research?
10. Citations/references are appropriate. Are all citations included? Is the number of citations appropriate for the content (neither too few nor too many)?
11. Clarity of the content. Will Widya Bhumireadership have difficulty understanding the content?

 

Ethical considerations

In addition to the aforementioned criteria, consider whether the manuscript contains instances of plagiarism, incorrect referencing, re-publication, or fraud. These four items do not constitute the entirety of publication ethics. If a reviewer believes the authors attempted to mislead readers, violated a copyright or patent, or may have jeopardized the journal's integrity in any other way, please contact the handling editor.

 

Good comments 

It is critical that all comments are constructive and intended to improve the quality of the manuscript and assist the authors in determining where improvements should be implemented.

 

Recommendations

Your final task as a reviewer is to recommend whether the manuscript should be a) accepted with minor revisions, b) accepted with major revisions, or c) rejected. If the manuscript is rejected, the reviewer should explain why to the author. Each recommendation should be backed up by evaluation results and constructive criticism.