About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Pendhapa is a journal that provides a forum for sharing, disseminating, and discussing research, experiences, and perspectives in interior design studies. Starting with Vol 11, 2020, Pendhapa published all articles in English. Pendhapa a journal in the field of interior design is collects the best critical work on all types of places. Interiors are critical in the formation of identity because they symbolize power and control through the contestation or violation of limits. Each of our homes, offices, retail malls, schools, hospitals, and restaurants is infused with significance and elicits unique multisensory and psychological responses. From a transdisciplinary viewpoint, this journal will examine the intricacies of the interior environment's orchestration and composition, as well as its impact on the occupant.

The interior is the journal's primary scope, and submissions from practitioners and theorists of interior design are encouraged. It will incorporate perspectives from a variety of disciplines, including anthropology, architecture, art and design history, cultural studies, and visual culture, and will be geographically and chronologically inclusive. The journal seeks to bridge the divide between theory and practice and to serve as a vital resource for everyone interested in the design, history, and significance of interiors.

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

Submitted papers are evaluated by anonymous referees by single-blind peer review for contribution, originality, relevance, and presentation. The Editor shall inform you of the results of the review as soon as possible, hopefully in 30 to 60 days.

The process can be described as follow.

  1. The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated whether it is suitable for the Pendhapa Journal focus and scope or has a major methodological flaw and similarity score by using Turnitin. The decision is rejecting or accept for a review process.
  2. The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Single Blind Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.
  3. Afterward, the editorial team meeting suggested the final decision to the revised manuscript by authors.
  4. Finally, the Editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author.
  5. The accepted manuscript then continued to the copyediting and layout editing process to prepare the camera-ready paper.

Review Outcomes

Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. The review process will take approximately 4 to 12 weeks. Decisions categories include:

  • Reject - Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript to this journal.
  • Accept with Major Revision - Manuscript will be review again after some major modifications are made.
  • Accept with Minor Revisions - Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in this journal under the condition that minor modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made prior to publication.
  • Accept - Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.

Publication Frequency

Pendhapa publishes 2 times a year in June and December.

Open Access Policy

This journal is an open-access journal that provides immediate, worldwide, barrier-free access to the full text of all published articles without charge readers or their institutions for access. Readers have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of all articles in Pendhapa. 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

Pendhapa 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 Pendhapa 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 Pendhapa, 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 

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

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

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

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of the research’s funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the publication’s scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably sure.
  12. 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.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

Retraction

The papers published in Pendhapa will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
  2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to Pendhapa will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Pendhapa 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 presented to Pendhapa must have a similarity level of less than 20%.

Plagiarism is the exposing 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 copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the source. This practice can be identified by comparing the source and the manuscript/work who is suspected of plagiarism.
  • Substantial copying implies for an author to reproduce a significant part of another author, without permission, acknowledgment, or citation. The actual term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, being often used in the context of Intellectual property. Condition 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 severe form to be identified.

 

 

Journal History

The history and achievements of Pendhapa each year can be seen as follows.
2010
- Pendhapa first published an article in Indonesian and only published one edition in one year. Local journal category because all authors are still in one institution.
2011
- The second year, Pendhapa does not change the number of editions published, one year is still one edition, and all authors are still in one institution.
2012
- The third year, Pendhapa added editions, one year two editions. Vol. 3 No 1 (2012) and Vol. 3 No 2 (2012). However, all authors are still dominated by ISI Surakarta (Local Journal). After 2012, Pendhapa was no longer active in publishing articles until the end of 2017. There was stagnation for five years. Then in 2018, Pendhapa resumed managing and publishing one-year, two-edition articles. All authors are still in one institution (Local Journal).
2018
- Pendhapa continues publishing with Vol. 9 No 1 (2018) and Vol. 9 No 2 (2018). All authors are still in the same institution (Local Journal).
2019
- Pendhapa maintains consistency of publications, one-year publishing articles in two editions, only all authors are still in one institution (Local Journal).
2020
- Starting in 2020, Pendhapa began to publish all articles in English, Vol 11 No 1 (2020), and has obtained authors from outside the institution so that the diversity of authors becomes visible. This year the qualifications of editors and reviewers have started well; editors and reviewers already consist of 4 countries.
2021
- Pendhapa in Vol 12, No 2 (2021) got authors from abroad, the authors consist of two countries, and this is the beginning for Pendhapa to become an international journal. This year, Pendhapa is preparing to apply for journal accreditation.