About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Ornamen is a Craft Art Journal that publishes scientific articles of the research results on the craft art and the creation of craft art within the scope of Indonesian culture. The substance presented is in the form of a mission to preserve the archipelago's cultural values and the development of concepts and aesthetics, in line with developing the complexities and dynamics of people's lives. The critical approach method in an interdisciplinary scientific perspective can open the broadest possible opportunity for scholars, researchers, and stakeholders to work together in advancing a dignified national culture during global competition. Art crafts journal ornament is published twice a year.

Peer Review Process

The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor for initial screening to the journal aims and scope and similarity level by using the Crosscheck/iThenticate Engine. The similarity level must less than 20 % (Exclude Bibliography) and the similarity score to each other source is no more than 3%.
These manuscripts will be sent to two reviewers anonymously (Single Blind Review).
Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses.
The decision of the revised manuscript will be then evaluated in an editorial board meeting, the final decision of whom are sent to the corresponding author.

Publication Frequency

This journal publishes twice a year in January and June.

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.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Ornamen is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the Ornamen does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the Ornamen, are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Section A: Publication and authorship

All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular manuscript.
The review process is double-blind peer-review.
The factors that are taken into account in the review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
No research can be included in more than one publication.

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
The authors must participate in the peer-review process.
Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
The authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
The authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should not review 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.

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Editors should have a clear picture of research funding sources.
Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the publication’s scope.
Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to the Ornamen will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Ornamen will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool, by a member of the editorial team. The papers submitted to the Ornamen must have a similarity level of less than 10% (Exclude Bibliography), and the similarity score to each source is no more than 3%.

Plagiarism is the exposure of another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. To accurately judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

An author can literally copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the original source. This practice can be identified by comparing the original source and the manuscript/work that is suspected of plagiarism.
Substantial copying implies an author reproducing a substantial part of another author, without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The substantial term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, being often used in the context of Intellectual property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.
Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words, or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more difficult form to be identified.