2.png)
1.png)
1.png)
1.png)
4.png)
1.png)
3.png)
1.png)
1.png)
- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process
- Open Access Policy
- Archiving
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
- Allegation Miss Conduct
- Publication Frequency
- Process for Handling Cases
- Direct Marketing Policy
- Informed Concent Policy
- Abstracting and Indexing
Focus and Scope
The topics related to this journal include but are not limited to
Materials Science
- Manufacturing Process
- Failure Analysis
- Heat Transfer
- Fluids Mechanics
- Lubrication and Wear
- Renewable Energy
- Structural Mechanics
- Modeling and optimization
Section Policies
Articles
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
The below-given flowchart explains the manuscript submission at a glance. Once the manuscript is submitted for publication, it is subjected to screening, quality assessment, reviewing, and further production processing involving language assessment, figure improvement, preparation of proofs, and incorporation of required corrections.
The submitted manuscript will be reviewed first by the Editor in Chief. It will be evaluated whether it is suitable for the Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST) focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw. If it meets the requirements, the similarity verification process will be conducted using the Turnitin software. When manuscript have similarity more than 20%, the manuscript is returned to the author for revision and resubmitted it. When the manuscript meets the requirements, it will be reviewed by a minimum of 2 reviewers through a double-blind process. The results of the review process are presented as a basis for the editor in making decisions. If the reviewer suggests revisions, it will be sent to the author to make revisions, and the review process will continue until round 2. Acceptance of the submitted articles considers the reviewer's suggestions and recommendations. After the article has been revised correctly, the manuscript will proceed to the production process. Articles will be published after the closing meeting of the Editorial Board.
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.
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...
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
JMEST is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia. JMEST is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to JMEST attest that their work is original and unpublished, and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour 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.
JOURNAL PUBLISHER CODE ETHICS
a) Determining the name of the journal, the scope of science, the timeline, and the accreditation.b) Determining the membership of the editorial board.
c) Defining the relationship between publishers, editors, peer review, and other parties in the contract.
d) Appreciating the confidentiality of the contributing researchers, author, editor, and peer review.
e) Applying the norms and regulations regarding intellectual property rights, especially on copyrights.
f) Conducting the policy reviews on the journals and presenting them to the authors, editorial board, peer review, and readers.
g) Making the behavior code guidelines for editor and peer review.
h) Publishing journals on a regular basis.
i) Ensuring the availability of resources for sustainability journal publishing.
j) Establishing cooperation and marketing networks.
k) Preparing for the licensing and other legal aspects.
EDITOR CODE ETHICS
a) Improving the quality of publications.
b) Ensuring the process to maintain the quality of published papers.
c) Leading the freedom in delivering opinion.
d) Maintaining the integrity of the author's academic track record.
e) Conveying corrections, clarifications, withdrawal, and an apology if necessary.
f) Owning the responsibility for styling and formatting the paper, while the contents and any statements in the paper are the responsibility of the authors.
g) Assessing policies and attitudes of the published journal from the author and peer review to increase responsibility and minimize errors.
h) Having an open-minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who are different than their personal opinion.
i) Prohibiting in defending our own opinion, the author or third parties, which may result in a false decision.
j) Encouraging the author in order to make improvements to the paper until it is worth publishing.
PEER REVIEW CODE ETHIC
a) Receiving the task from the editors to review the papers and submit the review to the editor as a matter of determining the feasibility of the paper for publication.
b) Reviewing the papers in a timely manner (on time) in accordance with the style guide based on scientific principles (method of data collection, the legality of the author, conclusions, etc.).
c) Reviewing the papers that have been corrected in accordance with the standards.
d) Encouraging the author to make improvements in the papers by providing feedback, suggestions, feedback, and recommendations.
e) Maintaining the author's privacy by covering the results of the corrections, suggestions, and recommendations received by the author.
f) Reviewers must not review any papers that involve the reviewers in their work, directly or indirectly.
g) Following the guidelines for peer review in reviewing papers and assessing the evaluation form paper given by the editors.
h) Reviewing papers substantively by not correcting the grammar, punctuation, and mistype.
i) Ensuring the principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritizing the benefit of the paper for the development of science, technology, and innovation; also comprehending the impact on the development of science writing.
j) Prohibiting in defending own opinion, the author, or third parties, which may result in decision reference becoming non-objective.
k) Upholding the value of objectivity and free from any influences.
l) Ensuring the confidentiality of findings in the paper until it is published.
m) Having a broad understanding of the expertise and being able to provide a review of the paper appropriately and correctly.
n) Refusing to do a review if the research is not from the field of expertise. Instead, the peer review should be giving recommendations to the researcher if there is any other expert on the subjects.
o) Having an open-minded personality in accepting the new opinion or views of others who are different than their personal opinion.
p) Refusing to do the review if the deadline given by the editor cannot be reached. If absent, the peer reviewer should notify the editor as early as possible.
q) The results of the review must be presented in an honest, objective and supported by clear arguments. Some possible recommendations from the review are:
1) Accepted without revision
2) Accepted with minor revision (after repaired by the author, it is not necessary to go to peer review)
3) Accepted with major revision (after repaired by the author, return to the peer review for re-review)
4) Rejected and recommended for other publication
5) Rejected and recommended not to publish to any publication because scientifically, the paper is flawed for the community.
r) Giving rejection for the last recommendation as the last choice related to the feasibility of the papers or with indication of severe violations of the code of ethics related to the author.
s) Reviewed papers aren’t allowed to be used for personal or third-party interests. Moreover, The use of some of the contents of the reviewed papers must have received permission from the author.
AUTHOR/ARTICLE WRITER CODE ETHICS
a) Author is collectively responsible for the work and the content of the article, which cover methods, analysis, calculation, and its details.
b) Author immediately responds to the comments made by the peer review professionally and timely.
c) Author should inform the editor if they retract their paper.
d) The author describes the limitations of the study.
e) Author respects the publishers if they demand to not to publish the findings in the form of interviews or through any other media before the publication.
f) The author informs the editor of (a) paper that is part of a phased research, multidisciplinary, and different perspectives.
g) The author makes a statement that the papers submitted for publication are original, have not been published anywhere in any language, and are not in the process of submission to another publisher.
h) If there is any error in the paper, the author should immediately notify the editor or publisher.
i) The use of materials from other publications which are copyrighted, should be given written permission and gratitude.
j) The author refers to the work of others as appropriate in citations and quotations used in the paper.
k) When delivering new discoveries or improving inventions, the authors should mention the job previous researcher/writer/founder.
l) The author is not allowed to give a bibliography of the publications if they do not read the publication.
m) If requested, the authors prepared the proof that the research has already met the requirements of the research ethics, including the field notes.
n) Author adequately responds if there are any comments or feedback after the paper is published.
Allegation Miss Conduct
Plagiarism
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
a. refer and/or quoting terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing sources in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
b. refer and/or quoting random terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing a source in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
c. using a source of ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
d. formulate the words and/or sentences themselves from the source of words and/or phrases, ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
e. submit a scientific paper produced and/or published by others as a source of scientific work without express adequately.
Prevention
Every article submitted to the Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST) will be checked by plagiarism software (Turnitin software) to assure that:
a. The article is free of plagiarism;
b. if at a later proved there is plagiarism in the article, the author is willing to accept the sanctions in accordance with the legislation.
Data fabrication
This concerns the making up of research findings.
- Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
- Suspected fabricated data in a published manuscript
Data falsification
Manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g., micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc.
Duplicate submissions
Duplicate submission is a situation whereby an author submits the same or similar manuscripts to two different journals at the same time, either within Academic Journals or any other publisher. This includes the submission of manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are no substantial differences in the manuscripts. Duplicate submission also includes the submission of the same/similar manuscript in different languages to different journals.
Authorship Issues
Clear policies (that allow for transparency around who contributed to the work and in what capacity) should be in place for requirements for authorship and contributor ship, as well as processes for managing potential disputes.
Citation Manipulation
Citation Manipulation includes excessive citations in the submitted manuscript that do not contribute to the scholarly content of the article and have been included solely for the purpose of increasing citations to a given author’s work or to articles published in a particular journal. This leads to misrepresenting the importance of the specific work and journal in which it appears and is thus a form of scientific misconduct.
Suspected Manipulation of Peer Review/Bias of Peer Reviews
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST)selects the reviewers on any manuscript with due care so as to avoid any conflict of interest between the reviewers and the authors. Our policy is compliant with COPE Guidelines on peer review.
SANCTIONS
a. reprimand;
b. letter of warning;
c. revocation of the article;
d. cancellation of publication.
Letter of Statement of free Plagiarism can be downloaded here
Publication Frequency
JMEST is published two times a year in July and November (Number 1-2)
Process for Handling Cases
The journal ensures that all of its published articles follow the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE (https://publicationethics.org/guidance).
Our objective is to uphold the credibility of the academic record for all published or potential publications. If we identify a substantial inaccuracy, misleading statement, or distorted report in any publication, we are committed to correcting it promptly and giving it appropriate visibility. In cases where a thorough investigation confirms fraudulent content, we will retract the item. The retraction will be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.
Corrections
Mistakes found in published papers may be addressed through a corrigendum or erratum when the Editor-in-Chief deems it necessary to inform the journal's readership about a prior error and takes steps to rectify it in the published article. The corrigendum or erratum will be presented as a new article within the journal and will reference the original published article.
Retractions
Retractions are initiated and disclosed when significant errors within an article render its conclusions invalid. Retractions are also enacted when there is substantiated evidence of publication misconduct, including plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical research practices.
According to industry best practice and in accordance with COPE guidelines, JMEST implements the following procedure if a retraction is confirmed:
1. A retraction note titled “Retraction: [article title]” signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in a subsequent issue of the journal and listed in the contents list.
2. In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
3. The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
4. The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the HTML and PDF indicating on each page that it has been “retracted.”
Editorial expressions of concern
When significant uncertainty arises regarding the authenticity or ethical conduct related to a submitted or published article, journal editors may contemplate issuing an expression of concern. This course of action is typically taken when an investigation into the issues surrounding the article has yielded inconclusive results, yet there are compelling indications that the concerns raised are credible. In rare instances, an editorial expression of concern may also be warranted when an investigation is ongoing but a final determination will not be promptly available.
The expression of concern will be linked back to the published article it relates to.
Direct Marketing Policy
The Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science and Technology (JMEST) adheres to the principles set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). JMEST acknowledges the significance of upholding ethical standards in the realm of direct marketing. This Direct Marketing Policy serves as a comprehensive document, delineating the directives governing direct marketing endeavors linked to JMEST. These guidelines are designed to ensure that all marketing initiatives are in harmony with the journal's core values, safeguard the privacy of individuals, and furnish recipients with information that is pertinent and beneficial.
JMEST policy for Direct Marketing:
1. Consent and Privacy:
- JMEST is committed to strict adherence to relevant data protection and privacy regulations. This commitment extends to all direct marketing endeavors, wherein JMEST will meticulously follow the prerequisites for obtaining consent from individuals as mandated by such regulation.
- Individuals who receive direct marketing communications will be provided with the choice to unsubscribe or decline to receive additional marketing messages.
- Direct marketing communications from JMEST will distinctly indicate the sender's identity and furnish precise details about the journal and its array of offerings.
- Any claims or statements presented in direct marketing materials will be grounded in accurate and current information.
- JMEST will strive to ensure that direct marketing efforts are targeted and relevant to the recipients.
- Marketing communications will be tailored to the interests and preferences of the recipients, taking into account their previous interactions with JMEST.
- JMEST will carefully control the frequency and timing of direct marketing communications to prevent overbearing or intrusive messaging.
- Marketing messages will be dispatched at suitable intervals, in accordance with recipients' preferences, and with the utmost consideration for preventing any form of harassment.
- JMEST will adhere to all pertinent laws and regulations pertaining to direct marketing, encompassing anti-spam regulations and laws safeguarding consumer rights.
- Direct marketing activities will align with the guidelines provided by COPE and other relevant industry standards.
- JMEST's direct marketing practices will undergo periodic reviews and monitoring to verify alignment with this policy and the pertinent regulations.
- Any apprehensions or grievances concerning direct marketing practices should be promptly conveyed to the JMEST editorial office for thorough investigation.
Note: By implementing this Direct Marketing Policy, JMEST aims to maintain ethical standards, respect the privacy of individuals, and provide valuable and relevant information to recipients while upholding the principles of COPE.
Informed Concent Policy
The Journal abides by the recommendations of JMEST and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on informed object consent for case reports and other articles of a similar kind. Unless the information is necessary for scientific research and the subjects or their legal guardians have given written informed consent for dissemination, written descriptions, photos, and pedigrees that reveal subject identify should be avoided. Identifying information should not be included unless absolutely necessary. To achieve anonymity, the object data should never be changed or fabricated. The manuscript must include a sentence addressing informed object consent.
Abstracting and Indexing
Currently JMEST is abstracted and indexed in