Abstract and Paper Guidelines

The Terms and Conditions

Abstract and Paper Guidelines

When You Want To Submit Your Abstract

Please Mind..

  • Submit your abstract (250-300 words) with 5 keywords and CV to icspi@ui.ac.id 

  • If your abstract is selected you are welcome to submit full paper to the conference committee by the designated schedule, Selected papers will have the opportunity to be published in Asian Politics and Policy, a peer-reviewed journal, or Knowledge-E Social Science conference proceedings, indexed by Crossref., Scopus, etc.

  • Applicants whose proposal is accepted, should submit full paper in 5000-10.000 words.

  • Papers criteria for evaluation:

    • Based on research

    • Never been published anywhere else

    • Original; No elements of plagiarism

    • Offers contribution to knowledge production.

When You Want To Submit Full Paper

Please Mind...

Manuscripts must be submitted electronically as an attachment using MS Word or Rich Text format. They must be formatted in a 12-point font, double-spaced with 1″ margins, and page numbers. All manuscripts should include a cover sheet with the authors’ names. For manuscripts with multiple authors, please clearly indicate the corresponding author’s name and (e-mail) address. Authors and co-authors must not be identifiable in the body of the text, and the title of the manuscript should appear on the first page of the text. Footnotes, tables, figures and charts must follow the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th edition). Tables, figures and charts must be numbered consecutively, clearly titled and the author must specify the position in the text, where they are to be placed. Camera-ready copy and computer files of all figures, tables and charts are required upon notification of acceptance for publication. Notes (endnotes) are not used for citation purposes, but for substantive comments. They should be identified by consecutive number in the text and grouped at the end of the text.
 
Abstract, Keywords, and Word Limits
All manuscripts must include an abstract containing a maximum of 150 words typed on a separate page. After the abstract, please supply up to five keywords. A two-sentence biographical description of the author(s) must also be included. In general, we are considers manuscripts from 6,000-10,000 words in length.
 
References/Parenthetical Citation
The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th edition) is the style guide used for citations, notes, references, and tables. Manuscripts not in proper format will be returned for correction. Authors are requested to pay particular attention to making citations in notes and references complete and accurate. As an exception to APA style, however, authors are requested to include the COMPLETE NAMES of authors in the reference list.This is to accommodate authors whose surnames are very short and common, as in many Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese names.
 
List references in alphabetical order. Each listed reference should be cited in text, and each text citation should be listed in the References section. References should appear on the final pages (last part) of the manuscript. Center the word “References” at the top of the page.

For More Detail Information

Please Read This Part Carefully

Publication Ethics and Policy

This conference and its Organizing Committee try to ensure the highest Ethical Standards for all involved parties:

  • For Authors
  • For Reviewers and Scientific Committees Members
  • For Publisher

  • Reporting standards: Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. Authors should describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others. 
  • Originality, plagiarism and acknowledgement of sources: Authors should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere – fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. If an author has used the work and/or words of others, that this original is been appropriately cited or quoted and accurately reflects individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
  • Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  • Ethics: Authors should only submit papers only on work that has been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and that complies with all relevant legislation.
  • 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.
  • 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 coauthors. 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 coauthors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper, and that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  • 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.
  • Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  • Scientific quality: Peer review is essential part  for scientific publication. Based on Reviewers decision and comments are selected papers for final presentation and publication. If necessary authors are asked to make revision of their submissions.
  • Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review for chosen 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: 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.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, marketing or other commercial revenue has no impact on editorial decisions. All members of our initiative will assist with communication with other organization, libraries, and publishers to set up and maintain best practices on ethical matters, plagiarism and other issues decreasing publishing ethics.

The Timeline

Review Process

Review process for proceedings is as follows:
  1. Abstract submission
  2. Abstract selection by the scientific committee
  3. Selection result / accepted abstracts announcement
  4. Panel grouping / classification
  5. Full papers submission
  6. First blind review by two reviewers from scientific committee, each of reviewers will review maximum 10 papers
  7. Revision by authors
  8. Revision submission
  9. Second blind review by two reviewers from scientific committee
  10. Second Revision submission
  11. Editing process by editorial committee
  12. Proceedings finalization