Focus and Scope

Mintakat: Jurnal Arsitektur (JAM) diterbitkan secara online sejak tahun 2017 oleh Universitas Merdeka Malang dalam pengelolaan Program Studi Arsitektur Universitas Merdeka Malang. Mintakat: Jurnal Arsitektur telah diterbitkan sebelumnya secara offline sejak tahun 2000 oleh Group Konservasi Arsitektur & Kota, Jurusan Arsitektur, Fakultas Teknik Universitas Merdeka Malang. Dalam format online JAM terbit 2 (dua) kali dalam setiap volume pada bulan Maret dan September. Dimaksudkan sebagai media publikasi arsitektur berupa karya tulis ilmiah yang diangkat dari hasil penelitian, hasil riset desain maupun gagasan kritis orisinil dari hasil review jurnal. Subjek kajian arsitektur pada intinya entitas arsitektur berupa ruang dan bentuk arsitektur dalam berbagai skala (tata ruang dalam, bangunan dan tata lingkungan atau kawasan), unsur-unsur yang berperan (manusia, masyarakat dan lingkungan), sistem tata nilai (sosial, budaya, ekonomi). Lingkup keluasan dan kedalaman tidak dibatasi namun diharapkan mengarah kepada upaya pemikiran dan pemecahan multidisipliner dan atau interdisipliner. Redaksi juga memandang perlu untuk sesekali menetapkan tema dan topik tertentu dalam edisi penerbitannya. Redaksi mengundang para ahli, praktisi dan siapa saja yang berminat untuk menyumbang tulisan, yang belum pernah diterbitkan dalam media cetak lain.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The journal was carried out through a process of peer review. Every article submitted to the editor will be received first by the staff editor then selected the selection editor for the next stage. the next stage through the Initial Review process by the selection Editor. The selection editor will continue the article to the reviewer stage and sent it to the editorial board and the executive editor will follow the next selection of the Review Process stage. After that, the article of the review process will be sent to the selection editor to be received or returned to the author for revision. This process takes a month for a maximum time. In each manuscript, the editorial board and peer reviewers will be assessed from substantial and technical aspects.

All submitted manuscripts are read by editorial staff. the manuscript evaluated by the editor becomes incompatible with journal criteria rejected immediately without any external reviews. The manuscript evaluated to be a potential interest for our readers is sent to two reviewer desks. The editor then makes a decision based on reviewers' recommendations of several possibilities: rejected, revision required, or accepted. The editor has the right to decide which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published.

Review Process:

1. The author submits the script
2. Editor's Evaluation (some manuscripts denied or returned before the review process)
3. Double-blind peer review process
4. Editor's Decision
5. Confirm to an author

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...

Ethics Statement

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
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 at any time 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.

Duties of Reviewers

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.

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
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.

Duties of Authors

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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

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.

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.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgement 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.

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. 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.

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.

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.

Review Guidelines

General

1. Give mark on the wrong part or part that need to be changed
2. Give mark on the right side of the wrong line or line that need to be changed

Detail

1. Title: Effectiveness, Specification, and clarity
2. Abstract: Complete and describe the essence  of article
3. Keywords: Describing the essential concept of article
4. Introduction: Up-to-date, originality, relevance of the Topic, compatibility of the important reason of the research object
5. Research Method: Has to emphasize on procedure and data analysis for empiric study
6. Result: Analysis accurateness
7. Findings: Up-to-date finding, relevance to the interrelated researchers, and the scientific contribution effect of finding /idea to the development of science
8. Conclusion: Logical, valid, brief, and clear
9. Suggestion: For practical action, development of new theory, and next/advanced research, Picture/Table: Center located, Not cut, Good quality to viewed, Picture/table title, Referred with capital letter
10. Bibliography: The degree of up-to-date and the reference to primary book sources. Rules: minimum 80% of the journals or the interrelated scientific researchers, above 2007 (year); the number of book sources minimum 10; minimum 80% in the text/material of art.

Full Review Process of Manuscript

1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organization?
2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.

Categories Decision

• Publish   : No Need Revision
• Minor     : Revision can be done by Editor-In-Chief or those who help
• Major     : Revision can only be done by author
• Rejected : Unproperly scientific or too many

Screening for Plagiarism

Indexing

• Google scholar
• Garuda
• Sinta-4
• Index Copernicus International (ICI)
  
  

Copyright Notice

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

(1) Copyright of the published articles will be transferred to the journal as the publisher of the manuscripts. Therefore, the author confirms that the copyright has been managed by the journal.

(2) Publisher of Mintakat: Jurnal Arsitektur is University of Merdeka Malang.

(3) The copyright follows Creative Commons Attribution–ShareAlike License (CC BY SA): This license allows to Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material, for any purpose, even commercially.

Indexing by

Index Copernicus International (ICI)

Tools:

Supported By:

MINTAKAT: Jurnal Arsitektur University of Merdeka Malang Mailing Address: Address: Jl. Terusan Raya Dieng No. 62-64, Malang, Indonesia, 65146 Phone/Fax: +62341-568395 Email: mintakat.arsitektur@unmer.ac.id   This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.