Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Journal of Nutrition and Food is a scientific journal that publishes various original research articles and review (by invitation) about nutrition and food, related to aspects of biochemistry, clinical nutrition, community nutrition, functional foods, and socio economy, including nutrition and food information and regulation. This journal is an official publication of Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Human Ecology, Bogor Agricultural University and PERGIZI PANGAN Indonesia, published since 2006. It is published regularly 3 times a year (in March, July and November).

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The suitability of manuscripts for publication in Journal of Nutrition and Food is judged by peer reviewers and editorial board. All the review process are conducted in blind review. The Technical Editor handles all correspondence with the author. The Chief Editor and Section Editors makes the final decision as to whether the paper is recommended for acceptance, rejection, or needs to be returned to the author for revision. 

Chief Editor and Section Editors will evaluate the submitted papers on prequalification step for suitability of further review process. The manuscripts will be evaluated by one or two reviewers selected by Chief Editor and Section Editors. The peer reviewers should examine the manuscript and return it with their recommendation to the Chief Editor or Section Editors as soon as possible, usually within 3 weeks. If one of peer reviewers recommend rejection, the Chief Editor will ask a third reviewer or Section Editors to decide the acceptance or rejection of the paper. 


Papers needing revision will be returned to the authors, and the author must return the revised manuscript to the Section Editor via OJS of Journal of Nutrition and Food. Section Editors check whether the manuscript is revised as suggested by peer reviewers. Sections Editors could give recommendation to Chief Editor that the manuscript should return to authors, accept, or reject within 2 weeks. After acceptance by Section Editors, manuscript is forwarded to the technical editor to be layout for editorial board meeting. Chief Editor would send an acceptance letter announcing the publication issue attached with manuscript reprint to authors.

There are three steps of revision process by authors: 1) revision manuscript to accomodate peer reviewer suggestions within 2-4 weeks; 2) revision to accomodate Section Editors suggestions within 2-4 weeks (if any); and 3) revision to accomodate editorial meeting suggestions within 1 weeks (if any). Manuscripts that exceed the revision deadline will be withdrawn. Authors may request for extension to Chief Editor before the revision expires. The time interval from the date the manuscript is submitted to the acceptance for publication varies, depending on the time required for review and revision.


Manuscripts are rejected usually for 3 general reasons: 1) The topic of manuscript does not fit in the journal scope and may be better suited for publication elsewhere. 2) The substance of the manuscripts does not meet Journal of Nutrition and Food standards; the data may be incomplete; the methodology used is not appropriate; lack of novelties and no advancement of the existing knowledge; or there are no consistency among objectives, research design/method, evidence, and conclusion. 3) Manuscript are not written following Journal of Nutrition and Food guidelines in Instruction to Authors. These manuscripts may be rejected without review process. Manuscripts could also be rejected in the review process if Authors do not revise the manuscripts as suggested by reviewers and editorial board, also do not give response/rebuttal against the suggestions.

If manuscript is rejected, the author will be notified by Chief Editor with a statement of reasons for rejection. The author may appeal to Chief Editor if he or she believes an unfair judgement has been made which enclose the author’s reasons. Chief Editor will review and discuss the reasons with Section Editors responsible for the manuscript, and later decide whether to accept or deny the appeal.

Reprints of all manuscripts will be provided to the corresponding author. The reprints should be read carefully, checked against the typed manuscript, and the corrections may be returned soon. Authors submitting manuscripts should understand and agree that copyright of manuscripts published are held by Journal of Nutrition and Food. The statement to release the copyright to Journal of Nutrition and Food is stated in Form A. Copyright encompass exclusive rights to reproduce, to distribute, and to sell any part of the journal articles in all form and media.  The reproduction of any part of this journal, its storage in databases and its transmission by any form or media will be allowed only with a written permission from Journal of Nutrition and Food.

 

Publication Frequency

The Journal of Nutrition and Food publishes three times per year (March, July, and November) since its' July 2006 edition.

 

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 statements

A publication ethics and malpractice statement

(composed using the Publishing ethics resource kit and in compliance with Elsevier recommendations)

Ethical guidelines for journal publication (These guidelines are based on Elsevier policies)

Journal of Nutrition and Food is a peer-reviewed journal publishing articles to develop a coherent and respected network of nutrition and food knowledge. It is important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Department of Community Nutrition, Faculty of Human Ecology, Bogor Agricultural University and PERGIZI PANGAN Indonesia  as publisher of Journal of Nutrition and Food  takes its duties of guardianship of all stages of publishing process and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition publisher and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Duties of authors (These guidelines are based on Elsevier policies)

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ëpassing of anothers paper as the authors own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of anothers paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. All of submitted works will be checked by anti plagiarism software.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the authorís obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of the Editorial Board (These guidelines are based on based on Elsevier policies and COPEís Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed Journal of Nutrition and Food is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of reviewers (These guidelines are based on based on Elsevier policies and COPEís Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewerís own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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.

Editor in Chief