Editorial Policy

Editorial decisions are based on relevance to the journal's focus and scope, originality, methodological and reporting quality, ethical compliance, and value to community-engagement scholarship. Decisions are made without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, belief, political view, or commercial status.

• The Editor-in-Chief has final responsibility for acceptance, revision, or rejection after considering editorial assessment and peer-review reports.
• The publisher, sponsors, partners, advertising interests, and article-processing revenue do not determine editorial outcomes.
• Editors must disclose relevant conflicts and recuse themselves when impartial handling cannot be assured.
• Submissions authored by an editor or editorial board member are assigned to an independent editor who has no involvement with the authors.

Editorial board appointments

Members are selected according to subject expertise, scholarly and community-engagement experience, publication record, integrity, availability, independence, and contribution to disciplinary, institutional, geographic, and gender diversity. Membership is reviewed periodically; inactive members or those who breach journal standards may be replaced.

Authors must follow the Author Guidelines and Submission Checklist. Submission confirms that every listed author has approved the manuscript, the work is not under consideration elsewhere, and any overlap with earlier publications, preprints, reports, theses, or conference materials has been disclosed.

• Editors conduct an initial assessment of scope, completeness, anonymization, reporting quality, declarations, and ethical compliance.
• Text-similarity and reference checks may be used. A similarity percentage is an indicator for editorial assessment and is not, by itself, proof of plagiarism.
• A submission may be returned for technical correction or declined without external review when it is outside scope, insufficiently developed, duplicative, ethically problematic, or unable to meet the journal's reporting requirements.
• Requests to withdraw should be submitted by the corresponding author with the reason for withdrawal and confirmation that all authors agree.

Manuscripts that pass editorial screening normally undergo double-anonymous peer review by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Authors and reviewers are not informed of each other's identities. Additional review may be requested when reports conflict or specialist assessment is required.

• Authors must remove identifying information from the review manuscript and submit author details separately through OJS.
• Reviewers must assess manuscripts objectively, provide constructive comments, declare conflicts, and decline when they cannot provide an impartial or timely review.
• Submitted material and review correspondence are confidential. They must not be shared or used for personal advantage.
• Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts to generative-AI systems unless confidentiality is assured and the journal has expressly authorized the use.
• Reviewer recommendations are advisory. Revision or a favorable review does not guarantee acceptance; the handling editor evaluates the evidence and makes a recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.

Further details are provided in the Peer Review Process.

Authorship

Each author must: (1) make a substantial contribution to the work; (2) draft the manuscript or revise it critically; (3) approve the version to be published; and (4) accept accountability for the integrity of the work. Contributors who do not meet all criteria should be acknowledged, with permission.

• Author contributions should be stated clearly, preferably using the CRediT contributor roles.
• Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors require a reason and written agreement from all affected authors. The journal does not adjudicate unresolved authorship disputes and may refer them to the relevant institutions.
• Gift, guest, purchased, and ghost authorship are prohibited.

Generative AI

AI tools cannot be listed as authors and cannot assume responsibility for a manuscript. Authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, citations, permissions, confidentiality, and disclosure. Substantive use of generative AI must identify the tool and explain where and why it was used. Undisclosed AI use, fabricated references, invented data, or manipulation of images or findings may be treated as misconduct. See the journal's Authorship and Contributorship Policy and Generative AI Policy.

Community engagement does not always constitute human-participant research. However, ethics approval or a documented exemption is required when mandated by applicable law, the authors' institution, a funder, or the nature of the activity—particularly for research, intervention, collection of sensitive data, or work involving vulnerable participants.

• When formal ethical review was required, authors must state the committee name, approval number, and approval date and provide documentation if requested.
• When formal review was not required, authors must state this and explain the basis for that determination, the consent process used, and safeguards against harm.
• Participation must be voluntary and appropriately informed. Consent from a parent, guardian, or legally authorized representative is required when applicable.
• Identifiable names, images, quotations, case details, or personal information require explicit consent for publication. Unnecessary identifiers must be removed and privacy must be protected.

See the full Human Participants, Consent, and Privacy Policy.

Authors must include a data-availability statement. Supporting data, instruments, code, protocols, or materials should be shared in a suitable repository when ethically and legally possible. Restrictions arising from consent, privacy, community agreements, intellectual property, or third-party ownership must be explained.

Each manuscript must provide declarations appropriate to the work:

See the full Data Sharing Policy.

Potential misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, inappropriate image manipulation, citation manipulation, authorship abuse, undisclosed conflicts, interference with peer review, and other conduct that compromises the reliability or fairness of the scholarly record.

• Concerns are assessed fairly, confidentially, and proportionately. The journal may request explanations or source files and may contact authors, reviewers, institutions, ethics bodies, or other journals when necessary.
• The journal does not make findings of legal guilt but may take editorial action to protect the scholarly record.
• Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence their work. Disclosure does not automatically prevent publication; undeclared or unmanaged conflicts may require editorial action.
• Information about submitted manuscripts is confidential and is shared only with those involved in legitimate editorial processing or integrity review.

The journal follows its Publication Ethics and Conflict of Interest policies, together with relevant COPE guidance, when addressing concerns.

Complaints may concern journal procedures, staff conduct, review integrity, published content, or suspected misconduct. An appeal must identify the manuscript or article, specify the disputed decision or process, and provide a concise evidence-based explanation. Disagreement with reviewer comments alone is not sufficient. The detailed procedure is available under Complaints and Appeals.

• Complaints and appeals should be sent through the journal's official contact channel, normally within 30 calendar days of the relevant decision.
• Receipt will be acknowledged and the matter will be reviewed by an editor who was not directly involved, where practicable.
• Allegations involving the Editor-in-Chief will be handled by the publisher or an independent senior editor.
• One substantive appeal is normally considered for each editorial decision. Appeal does not guarantee reversal and does not prevent investigation of new integrity concerns.

JPPMI may publish a correction when an error affects the article's accuracy, interpretation, attribution, or metadata but does not invalidate the main findings. A retraction may be issued when findings are unreliable, publication is redundant, research is unethical, or serious misconduct has occurred. An expression of concern may be used when a potentially serious issue remains unresolved and reliable evidence is not yet available.

• Notices will be clearly labelled, dated, freely accessible, linked to the affected article, and will explain the reason for the action.
• Retracted articles remain part of the scholarly record and are marked as retracted; they are not silently removed except where legal, privacy, or safety obligations require restricted access.
• Article metadata and relevant indexing records will be updated where technically possible.

See the full Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern Policy.

JPPMI provides open access to published articles. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal first-publication rights. Articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, subject to the journal's Copyright Notice.

There is no submission fee. An article processing charge of IDR 1,500,000 is payable only after acceptance to support editorial administration, OJS operation, production, DOI registration, preservation, and publication services. Payment does not influence peer review or editorial decisions. Full information is available under Author Fees.

Long-term access and permitted deposit are described in the journal's Archiving Policy and Repository Policy.