Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of ICT, Design, Engineering, and Technology Sciences (JITDETS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. While JITDETS is in the process of seeking membership with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the journal currently adheres to COPE’s internationally recognized Core Practices in all aspects of publication and editorial management.

JITDETS expects all parties involved in the publication process—authors, reviewers, editors, and readers—to adhere to these ethical principles. The journal is dedicated to ensuring that all submitted manuscripts are handled fairly, objectively, and transparently, and that allegations of misconduct are investigated thoroughly and impartially.

The ethical framework followed by JITDETS governs editorial decisions and determines the suitability of manuscripts for publication based on scholarly merit, originality, relevance, and ethical compliance. Cases involving plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, conflict of interest, and other forms of academic misconduct are treated with strict scrutiny and resolved in accordance with COPE’s guidelines.

For comprehensive information on publication ethics and best practices, contributors and readers are encouraged to consult the COPE guidelines available at http://publicationethics.org.

 Publisher’s Responsibilities and Ethical Commitments

As a publisher, the Journal of ICT, Design, Engineering, and Technology Sciences (JITDETS) adheres to the highest standards of publication ethics as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The journal is fully committed to ensuring transparency, integrity, and academic excellence throughout the publication process.

Editorial Independence and Decision-Making

• JITDETS guarantees the independence and finality of editorial decisions, ensuring that manuscript evaluations are conducted solely based on scholarly merit, originality, and relevance.
• The journal operates with complete transparency, free from commercial influence, and does not permit advertising or revenue considerations (including reprints or sponsorships) to interfere with editorial judgments.
• All decisions are guided by the journal’s policies and COPE’s ethical framework, ensuring consistency and accountability.

Integrity and Record Maintenance

• JITDETS is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.
• The journal maintains a rigorous approach to plagiarism detection, fraudulent data identification, and unethical research practices.
• When necessary, the editorial team will publish corrections, clarifications, or retractions to maintain the reliability and transparency of the published record.

Confidentiality of Submissions

• All submitted manuscripts are treated with strict confidentiality.
• Access to manuscript details is restricted to authorized editorial personnel, including the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, reviewers, and advisory board members.
• The journal ensures that no information related to a submission is shared with unauthorized individuals prior to publication.

Research Misconduct and Ethical Violations

JITDETS takes allegations of research misconduct seriously and actively works to prevent and address unethical practices such as:

• Plagiarism
• Data falsification or fabrication
• Citation manipulation
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest

Upon identification or notification of potential misconduct:

• An internal investigation will be conducted by the editorial board.
• If credible evidence supports the allegation, the authors will be contacted and given the
  opportunity to respond.
• Based on findings, appropriate actions may include:
• Rejection of the manuscript (if under review),
• Retraction or issuance of an erratum (if already published),
• Notification of the author's affiliated institution.

All procedures will follow COPE’s guidelines for handling ethical violations.

Standards of Good Scientific Practice

Authors submitting to JITDETS are expected to uphold internationally recognized standards of responsible research conduct, including:

• Submissions must be original and not under consideration elsewhere.
• Research should not be fragmented or salami-published into multiple articles.
• All data must be authentic, accurate, and verifiable.
• Proper citations and acknowledgments must be provided.
• All listed authors must:
• Have made a significant contribution to the work,
• Agree with the final version,
• Provide explicit consent for submission,
• Be responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the work.
• Authors may be asked to provide supporting documentation or datasets to verify the research.

Revenue Model and Advertising Policy

The Borneo Society of Engineering and Technological Sciences (BSETS), as the official publisher of JITDETS, fully supports the journal’s publication costs. JITDETS operates under a noncommercial model:

• No advertisements are accepted.
• No revenue is generated from subscriptions, or reprints.
• The journal maintains full independence from external funding sources or commercial interests.

Publishing Frequency and Digital Archiving

• JITDETS follows a biannual publication schedule, with occasional special issues on emerging topics in electrical engineering and related fields.
• All articles are permanently archived and freely accessible on the journal’s official website.
• JITDETS is indexed in reputable databases such as GARUDA, Google Scholar, Copernicus and Crossref, and is actively pursuing inclusion in major indexing platforms including Scopus and the Web of Science.

Duties of Authors

(Adapted from COPE: International Standards for Authors)
Authors must submit manuscripts in English, ensuring clarity, grammatical accuracy, and use of appropriate academic terminology. Submissions must be original and not previously published in full or in part (excluding abstracts, academic lectures, or theses), nor under consideration by any other journal or publisher.

The corresponding author bears the responsibility for ensuring that all co-authors have reviewedand approved the final version of the manuscript and consented to its submission. Additionally, authors must secure necessary institutional approvals prior to submission, particularly when the research is conducted under the auspices of a specific organization.

To support the integrity of scholarly publishing, authors are expected to participate in the peer review process, both as contributors and reviewers. Manuscripts submitted for consideration may be edited for language and clarity prior to publication.

Authors are required to disclose all sources of financial support for the research and/or manuscript preparation. The role of sponsors, if any, must be briefly outlined.

A signed copyright release form must be submitted by the corresponding author upon acceptance of the manuscript. Under the journal’s open-access policy, authors retain copyright ownership while granting others the right to use, share, and adapt their work, provided appropriate citation of the original source is maintained.

Authors must agree to allow the corresponding author to serve as the primary liaison with the editorial office, including reviewing and approving all communications and proofs. In the event of a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, authors are obligated to promptly notify the editorial team to initiate a correction or retraction.

All submitted manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using dedicated software. Plagiarism is considered a serious breach of publication ethics. Authors must ensure compliance with ethical guidelines and confirm that they have reviewed the final submission checklist.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be restricted to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who meet these criteria should be listed as co-authors to ensure transparency and maintain research integrity. The corresponding author must confirm that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and consent to its submission.

Contributors who do not meet the authorship criteria (e.g., those involved in language editing or technical writing) should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section, including their name and affiliation.

All authors share collective responsibility for the content of the work. Each author must be accountable for the integrity and accuracy of the entire manuscript. All authors are also required to sign a formal agreement confirming their contribution to the manuscript.

Upon submission, the corresponding author must complete and sign the JITDETS Copyright Form, listing all contributing authors and affirming the authority to submit on their behalf. An acknowledgment of receipt will be sent to all authors. For revised submissions, the Authorship and Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form must also be completed and uploaded. This form includes a CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) statement that outlines the specific roles each author fulfilled (e.g., Conceptualization, Data Curation, Writing – Original Draft, etc.). These contributions will be published with the article for transparency.

Authorship Disputes

Disputes regarding authorship are categorized as either interpretative disagreements or ethical misconduct:

• Disputes often relate to differing opinions about the significance of individual contributions. Authors are encouraged to resolve such matters internally, ideally through dialogue with supervisors or department heads.
• Misconduct involves unethical practices, such as unjustified inclusion or exclusion of
  authors. In such cases, authors should highlight the deviation from editorial policies and note
  that such actions may constitute scientific misconduct, which could lead to rejection or
  retraction of the paper.

The journal does not arbitrate authorship disputes. Such matters must be resolved at the institutional level. If a dispute arises during the review or publication process, JITDETS may pause the process until resolution is achieved. In all such instances, editorial correspondence will include all listed authors to ensure transparency. If authorship concerns emerge post-publication, corrective action (e.g., erratum, corrigendum, or retraction) may be taken in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Requests to Modify Author List

Authors should carefully determine the author list and order at the time of submission. Changes after submission are discouraged and will only be considered under exceptional circumstances, at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors must be approved in writing by all listed authors, including any newly added or removed individuals. Such requests must be submitted via the JITDETS Form for Request for Changes to Article Authors List. The completed and signed form must be submitted via the corresponding author's registered email address. If the change request accompanies a revised manuscript, the completed form must be uploaded as a supplementary file. All authors must be copied on the request email. Post-publication authorship changes will only be reflected through an official correction notice (Erratum).

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must present a precise and objective account of their work, with sufficient methodological detail to allow replication. All data should be reported truthfully and accurately. Misrepresentation or fabrication of data is considered unethical and is strictly prohibited.

Review articles should be balanced and comprehensive, and opinion-based pieces must be clearly labeled as such.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

To foster reproducibility and open science, JITDETS encourages authors to make underlying data publicly available where possible. This includes raw data, software, protocols, and other materials supporting the published findings.

Authors are encouraged to archive their data in reputable public repositories and include a Data Availability Statement with a link to the repository. Preferably, repositories should provide a persistent identifier (e.g., DOI) and maintain long-term preservation plans.

While data sharing is encouraged, authors may be required to provide supporting data for editorial review and, where appropriate, make it publicly accessible.

Originality and Plagiarism

All submissions to JITDETS must represent original work. Manuscripts that include material previously published in any form must properly reference the source through accurate citation or quotation. The Journal employs plagiarism detection software at multiple stages of the review process to ensure the integrity and originality of all submitted manuscripts.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submissions

Manuscripts submitted to JITDETS must not be under review or consideration by any other journal concurrently. Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered a serious breach of publication ethics and is strictly prohibited.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must ensure that all content within the manuscript is original. If the work or words of others are included, appropriate citations must be provided, and permissions obtained where necessary. All significant sources influencing the research should be acknowledged. Information acquired through personal communication or confidential interactions must not be included without express written permission from the source. Failure to properly credit the contributions of others constitutes plagiarism, which is considered unethical and unacceptable.

Additionally, contributions from individuals not listed as authors and sources of financial or institutional support must be acknowledged. As part of the submission process, the corresponding author must confirm that any funding received has been properly disclosed, including the name(s) of the funding agency/agencies and contract number(s), in the manuscript’s Acknowledgments section.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests

Authors are required to disclose any actual or perceived conflicts of interest, which may be financial, institutional, personal, or professional in nature. All sources of financial support relevant to the research must be disclosed. Prior to acceptance, authors must submit a completed and signed Authorship and Conflict of Interest Disclosure Form via the submission system. This information will be transparently presented in the published article under the section titled “Declaration of Competing Interest.”

Confidentiality

Information acquired through confidential avenues—such as peer review processes or grant application assessments—must not be used without the explicit written consent of the source.

Copyright and Open Access License

By submitting a manuscript to JITDETS, the corresponding author affirms that they have secured the rights to publish the content and that it contains no defamatory material. All co-authors are assumed to have approved the submission. Upon acceptance, the corresponding author must complete and upload the JITDETS Copyright Transfer Form, which confirms the transfer of all copyrights to JITDETS.

JITDETS is an open-access journal committed to free and unrestricted access to academic research. All published articles are made available under the terms of the Creative Commons AttributionNonCommercial 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), allowing non-commercial use with appropriate attribution.

Reviewer Nominations and Exclusion Requests

During manuscript submission, authors may recommend potential reviewers by providing their full names, affiliations, email addresses, and relevant areas of expertise. Reviewers should be independent and free from conflicts of interest. A balanced list reflecting geographic and institutional diversity is encouraged. While suggestions are welcome, the final selection of reviewers is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Complaints and Appeals

JITDETS handles all complaints, appeals, and allegations of misconduct in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. All concerns—whether raised before or after publication—will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief.

If the investigation reveals the need for correction, retraction, or clarification, the appropriate postpublication notice will be issued and permanently linked to the original article via DOI and URL. Appeals to editorial decisions must be evidence-based and will be reviewed by the editorial board or independent reviewers as necessary. To initiate a complaint or appeal, authors should contact the Editor at editor@jitdets.com. If unsatisfied with the outcome, the matter may be escalated to COPE or an appropriate institutional body.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Corrections to published content will be issued via formal notices that clearly state the nature and extent of the changes. These may include:

• Corrections for minor errors (e.g., typographical issues, data corrections, citation updates).
• Retractions for substantial issues that compromise the article’s validity, in line with COPE’s Retraction Guidelines.
• Removals only in exceptional cases involving legal or ethical violations, with an accompanying explanation.

Each correction or retraction notice will remain permanently linked to the original article to ensure transparency and academic integrity.

Ethical Oversight and Research Involving Human Subjects

Research involving human participants, biological material, or personal data must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant national or institutional ethical standards. Authors must include a statement confirming ethics approval in the manuscript, including the name of the approving body and reference number. For studies involving human participants under 16 years of age, informed consent must be obtained from a parent or guardian.

All authors are responsible for adhering to institutional policies concerning ethical research conduct. Peer reviewers are encouraged to comment on any perceived ethical issues within submitted manuscripts.

Duties and Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

(Refer to: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers)

Overview of the Peer Review Process

All scholarly content published in JITDETS, excluding clearly labeled editorial material, undergoes a rigorous double blind peer-review process. Peer review entails the evaluation of submitted manuscripts by independent experts who are not part of the journal’s editorial board. This process plays a pivotal role in supporting editorial decision-making and, through constructive feedback, assists authors in enhancing the quality and impact of their work.

When invited to review a manuscript for JITDETS, reviewers are expected to adhere to the following professional responsibilities:

Reviewer Responsibilities

• Conduct a thorough, impartial, and constructive critique of the manuscript, providing detailed feedback to help authors improve the quality of their work.
• Evaluate revised versions of the manuscript if requested.
• Submit reviews and all required information within the journal’s designated deadlines.
• Provide a clear recommendation regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication.
• Disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest—whether personal, financial, academic, or institutional—with respect to the manuscript or its authors.
• Report any concerns regarding potential ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism or data fabrication.
• Notify the editor immediately if they are unable to complete the review and, where appropriate, suggest alternative qualified reviewers.
• Treat all materials received in the course of the review process as confidential and refrain from using or sharing any part of the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.
• Refrain from contacting the authors directly or identifying themselves to the authors.
• Do not delegate the review task to another individual without the editor’s prior permission.
• Assess the manuscript's originality, scientific validity, clarity, ethical integrity, grammar, citation accuracy, and compliance with the journal’s author guidelines.
• Write review reports in fluent and professional English.
• Inform the editor if they are aware that the manuscript is under consideration or has been submitted elsewhere.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviewers play an integral role in upholding the academic standards of the journal. Their evaluations inform editorial judgments, guide manuscript improvement, and ensure the publication of high-quality research.

Timeliness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or are unable to meet the deadline should promptly inform the editor and withdraw from the review process to avoid unnecessary delays.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review must be treated with strict confidentiality. Reviewers may not disclose, discuss, or share any part of the manuscript with unauthorized parties. Any unpublished material or privileged information obtained during the review process must not be used for personal gain and should remain confidential indefinitely.

Ethical Vigilance

Reviewers are encouraged to identify potential ethical concerns, such as:

• Plagiarism or significant content overlap with previously published work.
• Data fabrication or manipulation.
• Inappropriate authorship claims or undisclosed conflicts of interest.

Any such concerns should be immediately communicated to the editor, along with relevant evidence or references where applicable.

Objectivity and Professionalism

• Reviews must be conducted objectively and professionally.
• Critiques should be focused on the content of the manuscript, not the identity or background
  of the authors.
• Reviewer feedback should be clear, respectful, and supported by scientific rationale.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers should consult with the editor prior to accepting an invitation to review if they have any affiliations, relationships, or interests that could compromise—or be perceived to compromise— their objectivity. This includes competitive, collaborative, or financial relationships with any of the authors or affiliated institutions.

If recommending citations to their own work (or that of close collaborators), reviewers must ensure these suggestions are made solely on scientific merit and relevance—not to artificially increase citation counts or visibility.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

(Adapted from COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors)
Editors play a central role in maintaining the academic integrity, transparency, and quality of JITDETS. The following outlines the ethical and professional responsibilities expected of all editors, including the Editor-in-Chief and members of the editorial board.

Editorial Authority and Decision-Making

• Editors hold full authority over the editorial process, including the acceptance or rejection of submitted manuscripts.
• Decisions regarding manuscript acceptance must be made in collaboration with qualified reviewers and, where applicable, other editors.
• Editorial decisions must be based solely on the manuscript’s academic merit, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and scientific rigor, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political ideology.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

• Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted materials, disclosing information only to those directly involved in the peer review and publication process (e.g., authors, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher).
• The anonymity of reviewers must be preserved unless explicit consent is provided.
• Editors must not use unpublished information or data contained in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the express written consent of the author(s).

Conflict of Interest

• Editors are expected to avoid situations in which personal, financial, or professional conflicts of interest may compromise, or appear to compromise, their editorial judgment.
• Any existing or potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed to the publisher prior to or during their term and updated as needed.
• Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists, including those submitted by themselves, their colleagues, or individuals with whom they have a personal or professional relationship.

Peer Review Oversight

• The peer review process must be conducted in a fair, objective, and timely manner.
• Research articles are typically reviewed by at least two independent experts with appropriate subject-matter expertise. Additional reviewers may be consulted where necessary.
• Editors must ensure the selection of qualified reviewers and uphold diversity, inclusivity, and impartiality in the process.
• Editors are responsible for reviewing disclosures of potential reviewer conflicts of interest or undue self-citation and assessing any implications for bias

Fair Practice and Transparency

• Editors must uphold transparency in all editorial procedures and communications.
• The submission and review process must be conducted through the journal’s official electronic system to ensure consistency and accountability.
• Editors should work with the publisher to provide a clear and fair mechanism for authors to appeal editorial decisions.
• Editors must not attempt to influence the journal’s metrics by requiring authors to cite the editor’s own work or articles published in the journal, unless citation is scientifically warranted.

Maintaining the Integrity of the Scholarly Record

• Editors have a duty to protect and uphold the integrity of the published record.
• In collaboration with the publisher, editors must investigate allegations of research or publication misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, unethical authorship practices).
• Where credible evidence of misconduct is found, editors must coordinate the timely publication of appropriate corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or editorial notes.

Commitment to Ethical Standards

• Editors must ensure that manuscripts are evaluated purely on academic and scholarly merit, maintaining a standard of objectivity and impartiality.
• Privileged knowledge obtained through peer review or editorial processes must not be exploited for personal advantage.
• Editors should proactively identify ethical issues and collaborate with relevant parties, such as institutions or professional bodies, when investigating misconduct.
• Editors must implement JITDETS’s policies regarding ethical oversight, including issues related to human subjects research, data transparency, and informed consent where applicable.

 

Peer Review Policy

(In alignment with the Publisher’s Peer Review Standards (COPE))

The Journal of ICT, Design, Engineering and Technological Science (JITDETS) adheres to a rigorous double-blind peer review model to uphold the quality, integrity, and scholarly impact of the manuscripts it publishes. This process ensures that each article aligns with the journal’s aims and scope while meeting the highest academic standards in research and analysis.

Review Process

All submissions undergo the following structured review process:

1. Initial Screening
   The Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary evaluation to determine whether the manuscript aligns
   with the journal's thematic scope and meets baseline quality standards.
2. Plagiarism Detection
   Manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software. Any submission with a similarity index exceeding 20% or flagged for ethical concerns is subject to immediate rejection, with authors duly informed.
3. Reviewer Assignment
   Manuscripts passing the initial checks are assigned to at least two independent reviewers, selected based on their expertise. Additional evaluations may be conducted by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors when necessary to ensure academic rigor.
4. Review Criteria
   Reviewers assess submissions based on:
   
   • Relevance to the journal’s scope
   • Originality and significance of the contribution
   • Methodological soundness and analytical quality
   • Clarity of presentation and academic integrity

1. Editorial Decision
   Based on reviewers’ evaluations and scores provided via a structured Review Form, the Editor-inChief makes the final decision: acceptance, minor/major revisions, or rejection. Constructive feedback is provided to authors regardless of the outcome.
2. Production Stage
   Once accepted, manuscripts move to production for formatting, proofreading, and publication preparation—typically within 30 days.

Reviewer Selection and Ethics

JITDETS maintains a regularly updated database of external reviewers with expertise across a range of disciplines in research, innovation, and technology. Reviewer profiles include qualifications, areas of specialization, and previous review performance, ensuring optimal alignment with the manuscript topic. For manuscripts involving niche or interdisciplinary topics, JITDETS may also solicit reviews from domain experts outside its core reviewer pool to ensure comprehensive evaluation.

Ethical Responsibilities

JITDETS expects all parties involved in the peer review process—editors, reviewers, and editorial staff— to adhere to its Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement as well as COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. Ethical conduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Maintaining strict confidentiality of manuscripts
• Providing objective and timely reviews
• Disclosing any actual or potential conflicts of interest
• Reporting suspected ethical misconduct to the editorial office

Confidentiality and Anonymity

All manuscripts submitted to JITDETS are treated as confidential. Under the double-blind model, both author and reviewer identities remain anonymous throughout the review process, ensuring an unbiased evaluation based solely on scholarly merit.

Conflict of Interest

To promote fairness and transparency:

• Reviewers are required to disclose any personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest.
• Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict exists, including submissions from authors affiliated with the same institution.
• In such cases, manuscripts will be reassigned to another editorial member who is unaffiliated with the submitting party.
• Reviewers from the same institutions as the authors are generally not invited to review. If a reviewer suspects the identity of the author, they are expected to decline the review.

Reviewer Guidelines and Resources

Reviewers are provided with a detailed Review Form and evaluation criteria prior to accepting review invitations. In addition, reviewers are encouraged to consult the following resources to guide their assessments:

• COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
• Peer Review: The Nuts and Bolts by Sense About Science
• Wiley’s Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics

Submission by Editors and Editorial Board Members

Submissions from editors or editorial board members are managed by an independent editor from a different institution to avoid any conflict of interest. The designated editor oversees the entire review and decision-making process, and any editor with a conflict is barred from accessing the manuscript or participating in discussions related to it.

Author Guidance and Feedback

Authors are strongly encouraged to consult the Review Form available on the journal’s submission platform to understand the evaluation parameters. When revisions are required, detailed and constructive comments from the reviewers and editors are provided to assist authors in improving the quality of their work.

Reviewers are notified of the final editorial decision and are informed if a revised manuscript will be returned for a second evaluation. Minor revisions may be reviewed solely by the editorial team.

Policy Review and Timelines

JITDETS regularly updates its peer review policies to align with international best practices. The current policy was last revised in January 2025.

Expected Timeline:

• Initial Screening & Plagiarism Check: Within 10 days of submission
• Peer Review Process: Typically completed within 30–45 days
• Production (post-acceptance): Up to 30 days

Authors are encouraged to maintain communication with the editorial office regarding their manuscript status and timelines.

 

Publication Frequency

The publishing frequency of the Journal of ICT, Design, Engineering, and Technology Sciences (JITDETS) is semi-annual (2 Issues Per Year).

 

Abstracting and Indexing

• Google Scholar
• GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital)
• Dimensions
• Copernicus
• CrossRef
• Publons
• SSRN
• Academia
• Mendeley
• Biblioteca Nacional de España
• OCLC
• WorldCat