FOCUS AND SCOPE
Wiga: Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Ekonomi (WIGA) has been published by STIE Widyagama Lumajang. WIGA is published twice a year in March and September.
WIGA focuses on issues relating to empirical investigations of the Indonesian economy. WIGA aims to tie researchers to share high-quality publications at the national level through a process of double-blind review.
Articles published in WIGA are expected to cover a variety of topics in the economic field and use standard economic analysis tools that focus on the Indonesian economy. Topics might include the fields of Economics: public economics, international economics, monetary economics, financial economics, game theory, health economics, labor economics and others related to economics. Business: finance, marketing, consumer behavior, human resource management, organizational behavior, strategic management, operations and innovation, entrepreneurship, ethics.
It is expected that students and researchers are facilitated by WIGA to play an important role in understanding the Indonesian economy.
PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Every manuscript submitted to Wiga : Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu Ekonomi is independently reviewed by at least two reviewers in the form of "double-blind review". Decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based upon their reports/recommendation. In certain cases, the editor may submit an article for review to another, third reviewer before making a decision, if necessary.
This journal is published twice a year in March and September.
PUBLISHING AND ETHICS GUIDELINES
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal reflects the quality of the work of the author with the institution concerned. Therefore, it is important for peer-reviewed journals to have ethical standards for all parties involved in publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, and publishers. WIGA is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints and / or other commercial revenues do not affect or influence editorial decisions. In addition, WIGA will assist in communication with other journals and / or publishers if this is needed for editors.
Duties of the Authors
The author of the original research report must present an accurate report of the work carried out as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. A paper must contain sufficient details and references to enable others to replicate the work. "Statements that are deceptive or intentionally inaccurate are unethical and unacceptable behavior". Professional publications and articles must also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinions must be clearly identified.
A writer should not, in general, publish a text that basically describes the same research in more than one journal or major publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is an unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, may not be used or reported without written and explicit permission from the source. Writing must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the study reported, and see and approve the final version of the paper and agree to submit it for publication.
All authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial conflicts or other substantive interests. When a writer finds significant errors or inaccuracies in his self-published work, it is the duty of the author to immediately notify the chief editor of WIGA and work with the editor to retract or repair the paper.
The authors must ensure that they have written the original work in full, and if the author has used the work and / or words of others that this has been quoted or quoted correctly. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'graduating' other people's papers as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing important parts of other papers (without attribution), to claim the results of research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
Writing must be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research reported. All people who have made significant contributions must be registered as co-authors (so that means that the manuscript has at least author and co-author). Where there are other people who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or registered as contributors. The appropriate author must ensure that all suitable co-authors and no co-authors are improperly included on paper, and that all co-authors have seen and agreed to the final version of the paper and have agreed to submit it for publication.
When a writer finds significant errors or inaccuracies in his self-published work, it is the duty of the author to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or repair the paper. If the editor or publisher knows from a third party that a published work contains significant errors, it is the duty of the author to immediately withdraw or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor about the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the Editors
The editor is responsible for deciding which articles are submitted to journals that must be reviewed and published. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always encourage that decision. . Editor in chief must seriously prevent defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor must evaluate the manuscript for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the author.
Any editor and editorial staff may not disclose any information about the manuscript sent to anyone other than the appropriate author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors and publishers, as appropriate. Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted text may not be used in the editor's own research without the author's written consent. Special information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Editors must resign from considering the manuscript where they have a conflict of interest. The editor must ask all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and issue corrections if competing interests are disclosed after publication. If necessary, other appropriate actions must be taken, such as publication of revocation or disclosure of concern. An editor must take reasonably responsive steps when ethical complaints have been submitted regarding the manuscript submitted or the paper published. Every act of unethical publishing behavior reported must be seen, even though it was discovered many years after publication.
Duties of the Reviewers
Peer reviews help the editor in chief in making editorial decisions and editorial communication with the author. Any selected referee who feels he is not eligible to review the research reported in a manuscript, or knows that a quick review is not possible, must notify the editor in chief and excuse himself from the review process. Each text received for review must be treated as a confidential document.
The review must be carried out objectively. Personal writer's inappropriate criticism. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Each statement that observations, derivations, or previously reported arguments must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must also draw the attention of the editor in chief of the substantial or overlapping similarities between the manuscripts considered and other published papers which have personal knowledge. Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted text may not be used in the reviewers' own research without the written consent of the author. Special 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.
This journal uses the LOCKSS system to create a distributed filing system among participating libraries and allows the library to make permanent archives of journals for preservation and restoration purposes.
Already have a username / password for WIGA?
Need a Username / Password?
Registration and login are required to ship items online and to check the current shipping status.
An acceptable manuscript will meet the following general criteria: he reports useful contributions to science, a good methodology is used and explained in sufficient detail so that other capable scientists can repeat the experiment. Conclusions are supported by data, concise texts, well written, and understandable.
The manuscript must be uploaded to the Wiga arranged in a standard format, Title, Author, Address and Email, Abstract in English and Indonesian, Keywords, Introduction, Library Materials, Methods, Results and Discussion, Conclusion, Recognition and Reference. Typed on one side of A4 white paper, in two columns, 1 space, 12 Times New Roman fonts and must be numbered in a row. Margins on sides are T : 2, L : 3, B : 2, R : 2 cm. Click in here
The title of this paper must be concise and informative. Avoid abbreviations and formulas if possible. It must be written clearly and concisely describe the contents of the study.
The manuscript has the main author and co-author with the full name of the author and co-author (no abbreviations), including the address and e-mail address clearly.
The abstract comes after the title page in the text. Abstract must be integrated and independent consisting of introduction and objectives, methods, results, conclusions and suggestions. But the abstract must be written as a single paragraph without this header. For this reason, references must be avoided. Also, nonstandard or unusual abbreviations should be avoided, but if necessary, abbreviations must be defined in their first mention in the abstract itself. Abstracts must be written using 150 to 200 words that have no references and are accompanied by keywords.
Keywords must avoid general and plural terms and some concepts. Don't use words or terms in the title as keywords. This keyword will be used for indexing purposes. Keywords cannot be more than 5 words or phrases in alphabetical order.
State the purpose of the work and provide adequate background, avoid detailed literature surveys or summary results. Explain how you solved the problem and explain the purpose of your study. When you write an introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. The introduction must be written using 750 to 1000 words.
It must specify the time and place of research in the first part. All materials and methods that use these chemicals for analysis, treatment and experimental design must be stated clearly and concisely. State the purpose of the work and provide adequate background, avoid detailed literature surveys or summary results. The Theory section must expand, not repeat, the background of the article that has been discussed in the Introduction and lay the foundation for further work. the Calculation section is a practical development from a theoretical basis. Materials and methods must be written using 400 to 600 words.
Results and discussion
The results and discussion must be written in the same section. They must be presented continuously from the main results to supporting results and supplemented by discussion. The measurement unit used must follow the applicable international system. All images and tables are placed separately at the end of the manuscript page and must be active and can be edited by the editor.
The conclusion must be clearly explained. Suggestions placed after conclusions contain recommendations about research conducted or inputs that can be used directly by consumers. Conclusions and suggestions must be written using 40 to 80 words.
Mention the source of the grant and the person given the grant. Give the name of the person to help you work.
The author's year notation system is needed and equipped. All references mentioned must be written in references using the style of the American Psychological Association (APA) and arranged from A to Z. Articles have the latest 10 or more references and 80% are journals. Most references are primary (last ten years). Unpublished data and personal communication should not be referred to as literature citations. "In Press" articles that have been received for publication can be quoted in reference. Included in the journal excerpt where the "in press" article will appear and the date of publication, if there is a date.
Reference to a Journal Publication:
Abdallah, E. H., Musa, Y., Mustafa, M., Sjahril, R., & Riadi, M. (2013). Comparison between hydro- and osmo-priming to determine period needed for priming indicator and its effect on germination percentage of aerobic rice cultivars (Oryza sativa L.). AGRIVITA Journal of Agricultural Science, 38(3), 222-230. http://doi.org/10.17503/agrivita.v38i3.886
Reference to a Book:
Bolda, M. L., Tourte, L., Klonskyk, K. M., & de Moura, R. L. (2005). Sample cost to produce fresh market rasberries. Berkeley, US: University of California Cooperative extension.
Reference to a Chapter in an Edited Book:
Tuong, T. P., & Bouman, B. A. M. (2003). Rice production in water-scarce environments. In W. Kijne, R. Barker, & D. Molden (Eds.), Water productivity in agriculture: Limits and opportunities for improvement (pp. 53–67). Manila, PH: CAB International.
Reference in Proceeding:
Hapsari, L. & Masrum, A. (2011). Diversity and characteristics of banana (Musa acuminata) diploid AA cultivars group collection of Purwodadi botanic garden. In D. Widyatmoko, D. M. Puspitaningtyas, R. Hendrian, Irawati, I. A. Fijridiyanto, J. R. Witono, R. Rosniati, S. R. Ariati, S. Rahayu, & T. Ng Praptosuwiryo (Eds.), Conservation of tropical plants: Current condition and future challenge. Paper presented at Proceedings of Seminar Cibodas Botanic Garden 159th Anniversary, Cibodas (pp. 225-229). Cibodas, ID: Indonesian Institute of Sciences
SUBMISSION PREPARATION CHECKLIST
- As part of the submission process, authors are required to check their submission compliance with all of the following items, and shipping can be returned to authors who do not comply with these guidelines.
- I have read and followed the gudeline writer. I understand that my article can be rejected if it doesn't follow the guidelines.
- Submissions have not been published before, nor before other journals to consider
- This shipment is original work, free from all forms of plagiarism (text, data, and numbers).
- This submission has been approved for publication by all joint authors and related authorities (eg an institution or sponsor).
- The authors adhere to ethical standards as outlined in the Statement of Publication and Malpractice Ethics
- I have downloaded and prepared the shipping document
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Articles are freely available to the public without any subscription with permitted reuse. For open access articles, permitted third party (re)use is defined by the following Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0)
The name and email address entered on this journal site will be used exclusively for the purpose of this journal and will not be available for other purposes or other parties.
This journal imposes the following author fees.
Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR)
Authors are NOT required to pay for Article Submission Fees as part of the shipping process to contribute to reviewing costs.
Article Publication: 0,00 (IDR)
Each contributing author to be delivered two copies of the journal (hardcopy). We encourage authors to promote our Journal to their colleague.
Before you accept or decline an invitation to review, please note the following questions:
- Was the article requested to be reviewed according to your expertise? If you receive a text that covers topics that are not in accordance with your area of expertise, please notify the editor or recommend alternative reviewers.
- Do you have time to review this paper? The review process must be completed within two weeks. If you agree and need a longer period, let the editor know or suggest an alternative reviewer.
- Are there potential conflicts of interest? Meanwhile, a conflict of interest will not disqualify you as a reviewer, disclosing all conflicts of interest to the editor before being reviewed.
The results of your review will help the editor decide whether to publish the article in our journal or not. Peer reviewers are responsible for criticizing by reading and evaluating the manuscript in the area of expertise, then providing constructive advice and honest feedback to the author of the article submitted. Peer reviewers, discuss the strengths and weaknesses of articles, how to improve the strength and quality of papers, and evaluate the relevance and authenticity of the manuscript.
Conducting a review
- The title explains the article content.
- An abstract must include goals / objectives, research methods, findings, and contributions in 150-200 words.
- Problem Formulation
- Introduction of problems and their significance
- Identify clear problems and appropriate research questions
- Coverage of problem complexity
- Clear goals
- Research Methodology
- A brief description of the usual research methodology
- Reasons for choosing a particular method are well explained
- Accurate research design
- Design samples accordingly
- The process of collecting data is correct
- Data analysis methods are relevant and sophisticated
- Empirical and theoretical benefits
- Economic benefits
- There are new findings
- References are discussed thoroughly in this article
- The reference reference given is strong
- Quotes and references are used correctly and honestly
- Article Presentation and Systematic Sequence
- Length of article
- Article presentation framework and flow
- Article originality
After you read the article and assess its quality, you need to make a recommendation to the editor. The recommendations are as follows:
- Scripts are not recommended for publication for one or more of the following reasons:
- It does not make new contributions to knowledge
- Many data or data errors are questionable
- Findings cannot be trusted, which may be caused by incorrect data
- Hypotheses are not defined or answered
- The methodology and / or procedures used are inadequate and / or inadequate so as not to answer the research question
- Statements and conclusions that do not meet the requirements are not supported by data and findings from this study
- It is not in accordance with the objectives and scope of the journal
- Accepted for publication. Scripts make new contributions using reliable data, methodologies and references. The analysis points are clearly presented. There are clear links from research questions to discussion of results. Manuscripts must be published.
- Minor revisions. Manuscripts can be published with minor changes as expected by reviewers. No further review is needed. The following are examples of reasons for minor revisions:
- Minor data errors that are easily fixed
- Typographic typographical errors (use of grammar, punctuation and spelling)
- Numbers and / or tables are too little / too much
- Some analysis points or references do not exist
- Main revision. Manuscripts may be published but major changes are needed. Further review is needed. The following are examples of the main revision reasons:
- Main data error (data does not match text, tables or images)
- Bad writing (incomplete sentences, large rewriting needs to have a logical flow)
- Hypotheses, methodologies and / or procedures are not clearly stated, making paper difficult for others to imitate
- Figures and / or tables require major revisions
- Some important points of analysis or references do not exist
- Note about revisions. If revisions are needed, please show the editor whether you will be happy to review the revised article.
The editor will have a final decision about the article whether to accept or reject the article. The editor can ask the author to revise the article before making a final decision.