Jurnal Jamu Indonesia (JJI) is dedicated to the exchange of information and widespread scientific understanding regarding the development of the world of herbal medicine through the publication of scientific papers. The themes of scientific papers within the scope of JJI include the theme of herbal medicine research from upstream to downstream which is not limited to ethnobotanical research and local knowledge, exploration, conservation, domestication of biological resources related to herbal medicine, variety breeding, development of Good Agricultural and Collection Practices (GACP) for herbal medicine raw materials, development of standards for raw materials and herbal medicine products, development of herbal medicine products, identification of active compounds and their synthesis, working mechanisms for the bioactivity of herbal medicine formulas, social and economic aspects related to the development of herbal medicine.

Overview: Jurnal Jamu Indonesia (JJI) publishes research articles, review articles, and short
communications. All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process to ensure the highest
standards of academic quality. This process includes the following stages:
1. Screening: The editorial team initially screens all submitted articles to ensure they align with
the scope of JJI. This phase involves assessing the content, formatting, writing quality, and
language. Additionally, a plagiarism check is conducted using Turnitin. The screening process
typically takes 1–2 weeks. An article may be rejected during this stage for one or more of the
following reasons:
a) The content does not fall within the scope of JJI.
b) The plagiarism check reveals more than 25% content similarity.
c) The article lacks significant academic contribution.
d) The study offers no practical application or relevance.
e) The article is poorly formatted, presented, or written, making it difficult to understand.
2. Peer Review: If an article passes the screening stage, it is then subjected to peer review. The
editorial team selects two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. These reviewers must
be from different institutions than the authors and from each other. JJI employs a single-blind
review process, where reviewers are aware of the authors' identities, but the authors do not know
the reviewers. The peer review process typically takes 2–3 months.
3. Notification of Peer Review Results: After the peer review process, the editorial team makes
the final decision based on the reviewers' feedback. Authors will be notified of one of the
following outcomes:
a) Accepted as is
b) Accepted with minor revisions
c) Requires extensive revision and reconsideration by the Associate Editor
d) Requires extensive revision and reconsideration by the original reviewers
e) Rejected
4. Revision: Authors whose articles require revision must address the reviewers' comments and
resubmit their work. The revised article is then evaluated by the editorial team or, in some cases,
by the original reviewers if they have requested to do so. Language editing services may be
offered if necessary. The revision process, from submission to the final decision, typically takes
up to 6 weeks.
5. Proofing: Accepted articles undergo proofreading, with proofs sent electronically to
corresponding authors for verification. Corrections are expected within 48 hours.

Starting in 2024, Jurnal Jamu Indonesia will be published three times a year.

Jurnal Jamu Indonesia 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.

Jurnal Jamu Indonesia (JJI) is an accredited national journal reviewed by Bestari partners, published twice a year in online form. JJI follows the scientific publication ethics code from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in dealing with all aspects of publication ethics, especially handling research and publication errors. This Publication Ethics explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing an article in this Journal, including the Author, Chair of the Editorial Board, Editorial Board, Bestari Partners, and the publisher (Center for Tropical Biopharmaceutical Studies).

Ethics for Journal Publication

The scientific publication of an article is the result of the work of thought of a person or group of people; after going through the scientific review, it is disseminated in the form of scientific writing, including in the form of journals, books, proceedings, research reports, scientific papers, and posters. This scientific publication directly reflects the quality of the author's scientific writing and the institution where the author works. Therefore, it is important to agree on the ethical standards of behavior expected for all parties involved in publishing: authors, editors or journal editors, publishers, publishers, and the public.

The Tropical Biopharmaceutical Study Center (Trop-BRC), IPB University, as the publisher of Jurnal Jamu Indonesia, monitors all stages of publication carefully and regarding our ethics and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or additional commercial revenues do not impact or influence the decisions of the Editorial Board. Apart from that, Trop-BRC - IPB University and the Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers if this is useful and necessary.

Ethics for Editors

The editorial staff of the Jurnal Jamu Indonesia determines the publication process. It integrates the functions of authors, peer reviewers, and journal managers to publish written works based on scientific and ethical principles. The editorial team responds to criticism, suggestions, and objections from authors honestly and transparently. The editorial task is also to maintain the Journal's independence from pure commercialization considerations and strive for the Journal to remain a top-class journal in its field. The editorial team works based on the following principles and ethical standards.

1. Responsible for the choice of journal content and strives to continuously improve the quality of publications.
2. Responsible for creating writing guides for authors along with templates.
3. Critically assess that written works are free from ethical violations, honest and objective, independent, assessing each on quality without regard to the author's nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation, and free from prejudice in making decisions including in choosing peer reviewers.
4. Ensure that reviewing written work is carried out thoroughly, transparently, objectively, and fairly.
5. Guarantee that all written works published have been reviewed by qualified peer reviewers.
6. Guarantee the suitability of the peer reviewers selected according to their competencies. The peer reviewers chosen members are those who can consider written work and do not have a conflict of interest.
7. Reject written work without going through a review process if it does not match the scope of the Journal or is of low quality, but not because of the author's background or affiliated institution.
8. Strive to ensure published research complies with relevant national scientific publication ethical codes and/or international guidelines.

Ethics for Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers help the editorial team critically examine the substance of scientific papers by their field of expertise, so a bastard partner plays a vital role in the scientific publication process. Mitra Bestari works based on the following principles and ethical standards.

1. Required to be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only side with scientific truth.
2. You must be critical in assessing the content of a written work according to your field of expertise, be open about new things, keep evaluated things confidential, not take personal advantage of the written work being assessed, and have the enthusiasm to improve the written work you have reviewed.
3. Has the task of assisting the editor in determining written works that can be published and helping authors improve the quality of their written work.
4. Required to always adhere to basic principles and scientific analysis in carrying out the process of reviewing a written work.
5. The study results are presented honestly and objectively and supported by clear arguments. Several possible recommendations as a result of the review: (i) accepted without correction or accepted with minor improvements (after correction by the author, no need to return to the peer reviewers), (ii) accepted with improvements (after correction by the author, returned to the peer reviewers for review ), (iii) rejected and recommended for publication in another appropriate place, (iv) rejected and recommended not to be published anywhere because the work is scientifically flawed or has a detrimental impact on users/society.
6. Do not use the written work reviewed for personal or third-party interests. The author permitted some of the contents of the written work under review. The written work being reviewed may be distributed in a variety of ways.

Ethics for Authors

An author in a scientific journal expresses the results of his thoughts and/or research and development in the form of written work that meets the requirements of scientific and ethical principles. Research aims to obtain new knowledge, add to scientific knowledge beyond the limits of known knowledge, or produce scientific methods of solving the problems faced. The result of this process is the author's contribution as an individual in contributing to knowledge. The author works based on the requirements of scientific principles and ethical standards.

1. Make a statement that the written work submitted for publication is original, has never been published anywhere in any language, and is not in the process of being submitted to another publisher. If there are errors in the written work, the author immediately informs the editor or publisher.
2. Ensure that the names listed as authors are included in the order of contribution and approved by all members. If there is a change, reduction, or addition to the author's name, it must be agreed upon by the other authors first. The author ensures that all parties who contributed non-substantially to the written work will be thanked.
3. Collectively responsible for the article's work and content, including methods, analysis, calculations, and details.
4. Inform the editor if you will withdraw your written work.
5. Inform the editor about written work, part of a gradual, multidisciplinary research with different perspectives.
6. If requested, the author prepares evidence that the research conducted has met research ethics requirements, including providing field notes or a research log book. The author responds adequately if there are comments or responses after the written work is published.
7. Do not plagiarize or self-plagiarize; salami publication is strictly prohibited in the Jurnal Jamu Indonesia.