Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu is a peer review and open access journal that focuses on administrative science. This focus includes related areas and scopes:

- Social Sciences

- Commerce Administration Science

- State Administration Science


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The practice of peer review is to ensure that only good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals. Our referees play a vital role in maintaining the high standards Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu and all manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.

Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.

Type of Peer Review Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu employs double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

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: - Is original - Is methodologically sound - Follows appropriate ethical guidelines - Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions - Correctly references previous relevant work.

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

How long does the review process take? The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee’s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. In rare cases for which it is extremely difficult to find a second referee to review the manuscript, or when the one referee’s report has thoroughly convinced the Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made on the basis of only one referee’s report. 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.

Final report 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.

Editor’s Decision is final Referees advise the editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Becoming a referee for Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu If you are not currently a referee for Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu but would like to be considered as a referee, please contact the editor. The benefits of refereeing for Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu include the opportunity to read see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to contribute to the overall integrity of scientific research and its published documentation. You may also be able to cite your work for Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu as part of your professional development requirements for various Professional Societies and Organisations.


Publication Frequency

Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu is published annually in June and December


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.


Screening for Plagiarism

every article sent to a similarity check will be carried out using the Turnitin application with a maximum limit of 25% if the similarity percentage of the article exceeds 25% then the article will be returned to the author to be repaired



Author Fees

General Information on Pelita Ilmu Article Processing Charges (APC)

Pelita Ilmu publishes all its journals in full open access, meaning unlimited use and reuse of articles, in addition to giving credit to the authors. All our articles are published under a Creative Commons (CC BY) license.

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are NOT required to pay an Article Processing Charge (Article Submission Fee) as part of the submission process to contribute to review costs.


Article Publication: 250000.00 (IDR)
If this paper is accepted for publication, you will be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publication costs.




Publication Ethics

Statement of Publication Ethics and Malpractice

Majalah Ilmiah Pelita Ilmu is a community service journal published regularly 2 times a year which contains six community service articles each published. Pelita Ilmu Journal is expected to be a medium for findings, innovation, and the application of social science in administration supported by practitioners in the field of administration. The following statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing articles in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editor.

Author's Duties

  1. Reporting Standards: The author must present an accurate report of the original research carried out as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly and without falsification, falsification or manipulation of inappropriate data. A manuscript must contain enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow the journal submission guidelines.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written the original work completely. Manuscripts must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editor has agreed to a joint publication. Previous works and relevant publications, both by other researchers and those of the author, must be recognized and referred accordingly. Primary literature should be quoted if possible. Original words taken directly from publications by other researchers must appear in quotation marks with appropriate quotes.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Simultaneous Publications: In general writers may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. It is also hoped that the author will not publish excessive manuscripts or manuscripts that describe the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same text to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Various publications arising from a research project must be clearly identified and the main publications must be referred.
  4. Recognition of Sources: The author must acknowledge all data sources used in the study and cite publications that have an influence in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper recognition of the work of others must always be given.
  5. Essay Papers: Writing research publications must accurately reflect an individual's contribution to his work and reporting. Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation or interpretation of the research reported. Others who have made significant contributions must be registered as joint authors. In cases where the main contributors are listed as authors while those who make less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to research or publications are listed in the recognition section. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and agreed to the version of the manuscript sent and the inclusion of their names as joint authors.

  6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their texts any conflicts of financial or other substantive interests that might be interpreted to affect the results or interpretation of their manuscripts. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

  7. Fundamental Mistakes in Published Works: If the writer discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the text submitted, the writer must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  8. Dangers and Subjects of Humans or Animals: The author must clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Editor's Duties

  1. Publication Decision: Based on a review report from the editorial board, editors can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always drive the decision. The editors can be guided by the policies of the journal editorial board and are limited by the legal requirements that will apply regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor can negotiate with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published records.
  2. Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must regulate and use peer review fairly and wisely. The editor must explain their peer review process in information for the author and also indicate which part of the journal is reviewed by a colleague. Editors must use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those who have conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: Editors must ensure that every text received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without considering the gender, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the author. An important part of the responsibility for making fair and impartial decisions is the enforcement of the principles of independence and editorial integrity. The editor is in a strong position by making decisions about publication, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information about the manuscript submitted by the author is kept confidential. The editor must critically assess any potential breach of patient data protection and confidentiality. This includes requiring approval based on correct information for the actual research presented, approval for publication if applicable.
  5. Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest: Journal Editors will not use unpublished material that is disclosed in texts submitted for their own research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers where they have a conflict of interest.

Review Task

  1. Confidentiality: Information about the manuscript submitted by the author must be kept confidential and treated as special information. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Recognition of Sources: The reviewer must ensure that the author has acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. The reviewer must identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that observations, derivations, or arguments have been reported before must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers must immediately notify the journal if they find irregularities, have concerns about the ethical aspects of the work, know the substantial similarities between the manuscript and submission together with other journals or articles published, or suspect that violations may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers must, however,
  3. Objectivity Standards: The review of submitted documents must be carried out objectively and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers must follow journal instructions about the specific feedback needed from them and, unless there is good reason not to do so. Reviewers must be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help writers to improve their manuscripts. The reviewer must make clear which additional investigations are suggested which are important to support the claims made in the text being considered and which will only strengthen or extend work.
  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers may not consider texts where they have a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies or institutions connected with the paper. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author (s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises a potential conflict of interest.
  5. Accuracy: The reviewer must respond within a reasonable time frame. Reviewers only agree to review the manuscript if they are reasonably sure they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe, informing the journal immediately if they need an extension. In the case that the reviewer feels it is not possible for him to complete the review of the manuscript within the allotted time, this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.