Focus and Scope

The below mentioned areas are just indicative. The editorial board also welcomes innovative articles that redefine any Sports Science, health and Physical Education field.

Sports Science

• Kinesiology
• Philosophy of Sport
• Political Science of Sport
• Sociology of Sport
• Sport History
• Sport Management
• Sport Biomechanics
• Sport Pedagogy
• Sport Performance
• Sport Psychology
• Sports Law

Health

• Exercise Physiology
• Health Science
• Nutrition
• Nursing
• Physical activity, health and exercise science
• Sport Medicine

Physical Education

• Adapted Physical Education
• Coaching Science
• Physical Education Curriculum
• Didactics, Educational Technologies and Special Pedagogy
• Motor Learning and Control
• Physical Education Teacher Education

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The Journal operates a peer review process and promotes blind reviewing. Detailed information of peer reviewed process :

All papers are fully peer-reviewed. We only publish articles that have been reviewed and approved by highly qualified researchers with expertise in a field appropriate for the article. We used single blind peer-reviewing process. Detailed information about the flow for the manuscript submission (author) to the acceptance by editor is shown in the following figure.

In short, the steps are:

1. Manuscript Submission (by author) (route 1)
2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors) (route 2). Editors have a right to directly accept, reject, or review. Prior to further processing steps, plagiarism check using turtitin is applied for each manuscript.
3. Manuscript Reviewing Process (by reviewers) (route 3-4)
4. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers comments) (route 5)
5. Paper Revision (by author)
6. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with similar flow to point number 1. (route 1)
7. If reviewer seems to be satisfied with revision, notification for acceptance (by editor). (route 6)
8. Galley proof and publishing process  (route 7 and 8)

The steps point number 1 to 5 is considered as 1 round of peer-reviewing process (see grey area in the figure). And, our reviewing process at least goes through 2 round of reviewing process.

The journal editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most common decisions:

(i)   accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper in its original form

(ii)  accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections

(iii) accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance ): the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors

(iv)revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes

reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions

The acceptance or rejection of articles will be decided by the editorial boards based the review results supplied by the reviewers.

There are no communications between authors and editors concerning the rejection decision.

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 PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)'s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals published by Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia is process of permanent knowledge improvement. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore 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 of society-owned or sponsored journals.
We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS
(Based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)'s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)

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 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

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 behaviour 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. 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 manuscri

The IJSSHPE is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.