FOCUS AND SCOPE

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by the Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal provides an academic platform for disseminating the results of community service and community engagement activities that contribute to solving community problems, strengthening local capacities, transferring knowledge and technology, and supporting sustainable community development.

RESONA welcomes scholarly manuscripts based on the implementation, evaluation, and outcomes of community service programs. Contributions may involve interdisciplinary approaches and collaboration among academics, practitioners, community organizations, public institutions, and other relevant stakeholders. Manuscripts should demonstrate a clear connection between identified community needs, the activities undertaken, and the benefits achieved.

Focus

The primary focus of RESONA is the publication of evidence-based community service activities, including community empowerment, participatory assistance, training, mentoring, the application of appropriate technologies, and the dissemination of research-based innovations for community benefit. Priority is given to manuscripts that explain the engagement process and provide credible evidence of outputs, outcomes, or meaningful changes among the participating communities.

Scope

The journal covers, but is not limited to, the following areas of community service and engagement:

1. Social and Community Development. Community empowerment, social inclusion, strengthening community-based institutions, participatory development, social welfare initiatives, and sustainable local development.
2. Education. Community education, teacher and educator development, educational outreach, learning innovations, capacity-building programs, and the improvement of educational access and quality.
3. Science and Applied Technology. Knowledge and technology transfer, application of appropriate technologies, science-based community interventions, environmental practices, technical training, and innovation adoption by community partners.
4. Sports and Community Well-being. Community sports programs, physical activity promotion, sports education, recreational initiatives, and engagement activities supporting community well-being.
5. Language and Literacy. Language training, reading and writing literacy, digital and information literacy, community communication skills, and literacy-based empowerment programs.
6. Business and Economics. Micro, small, and medium enterprise (MSME) development, entrepreneurship assistance, financial literacy, marketing skills, business management, cooperative empowerment, and local economic development.

Types of Manuscripts Considered

RESONA primarily considers original scholarly articles reporting completed community service or community engagement activities. Manuscripts on the application of research findings or innovations are welcome when they document a substantive implementation process with community partners and evaluate its results.

Purely theoretical papers, stand-alone literature reviews, conventional research articles without an identifiable community service component, and descriptions of planned activities without implementation results are generally outside the journal's primary scope.

Essential Elements of Submitted Articles

To ensure relevance to the journal's mission, submitted manuscripts should clearly address the following elements:

1. Community Needs and Partner Context. Identification of the community partner, local conditions, problems, and the rationale for the activity.
2. Objectives and Engagement Approach. Clear objectives and a description of the involvement of community members or partner institutions.
3. Implementation Methods. A transparent account of activity stages, approaches, tools, materials, and relevant participation mechanisms.
4. Results and Evaluation. Evidence of outputs and outcomes, supported where appropriate by observations, evaluation instruments, participant feedback, or other suitable indicators.
5. Contribution and Sustainability. An explanation of practical benefits, limitations, opportunities for follow-up, and prospects for sustaining the activities or their outcomes.
6. Ethical Considerations. Appropriate respect for community participants, permissions, consent, privacy, and applicable ethical requirements.

Editorial Considerations

All submissions are evaluated for relevance to the journal's focus and scope, clarity of community needs, methodological transparency, quality of evidence, ethical compliance, and practical contribution. Acceptance is subject to editorial assessment and peer review in accordance with RESONA's published editorial policies.

RESONA encourages submissions from diverse disciplines and institutions, provided that the main contribution is grounded in genuine community service or community engagement and its documented outcomes.

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal published by Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, transparency, and accountability throughout the editorial and publication processes.

RESONA publishes scholarly articles reporting community service activities, community empowerment initiatives, knowledge transfer, capacity building, and sustainable community development. This publication ethics statement outlines the responsibilities of publishers, editors, reviewers, and authors and is developed with reference to the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Duties and Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher is responsible for maintaining the integrity, continuity, independence, and transparency of the scholarly publication process. The publisher supports editorial independence and ensures that editorial decisions are based on academic merit, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's focus and scope.

The publisher is committed to supporting fair editorial procedures, investigating publication misconduct, preserving published scholarly records, ensuring transparency regarding publication charges and licensing policies, and assisting the editorial team in issuing corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Publication Decisions. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board are responsible for determining which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication based on scholarly quality, originality, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, relevance, and recommendations from qualified peer reviewers.

Fair and Objective Evaluation. Editors evaluate manuscripts without discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, nationality, religion, institutional affiliation, political beliefs, or other irrelevant personal characteristics.

Confidentiality. Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and may disclose manuscript information only to individuals legitimately involved in the editorial process.

Conflicts of Interest. Editors must disclose any relationships or interests that could compromise their impartiality. Manuscripts involving significant conflicts of interest must be handled by another qualified editor.

Editorial Integrity. Editors must not use unpublished information, data, or ideas obtained from submitted manuscripts for personal benefit without explicit permission from the authors.

Ethical Oversight. Editors must appropriately investigate credible allegations of plagiarism, fabricated or falsified information, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, unethical community engagement, or other publication misconduct.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Reviewers assist editors in evaluating scholarly quality, methodological soundness, originality, clarity, and potential community impact. Constructive feedback should help authors improve their manuscripts.

Promptness. Reviewers who lack the required expertise or cannot complete an evaluation within the agreed period must promptly inform the editorial team.

Confidentiality. Manuscripts received for peer review are confidential documents and must not be distributed, discussed, or disclosed to unauthorized parties.

Objectivity. Reviews must be conducted fairly, professionally, and respectfully. Personal criticism is inappropriate, and assessments must be supported by clear arguments and scholarly evidence.

Acknowledgment of Sources. Reviewers should identify relevant scholarly works that have not been appropriately cited and notify editors of substantial similarities with previously published materials.

Conflicts of Interest. Reviewers must disclose relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional conflicts of interest and decline assignments when impartiality cannot be maintained.

Ethical Responsibility. Reviewers should alert editors to suspected plagiarism, fabricated findings, misleading reporting, inappropriate use of community data, or other ethical violations.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Standards. Authors must provide accurate, objective, and sufficiently detailed descriptions of community service activities, including the problems addressed, objectives, implementation methods, partner involvement, evaluation procedures, outcomes, and limitations.

Originality and Plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts must represent original scholarly work. All ideas, words, data, methods, and intellectual contributions originating from other sources must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.

Multiple and Concurrent Publication. Authors must not submit substantially identical manuscripts to multiple journals simultaneously. Prior dissemination or related publication must be transparently disclosed when relevant.

Authorship and Contributions. Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions, approval of the final manuscript, and accountability for its content. Guest, gift, and ghost authorship are prohibited.

Acknowledgment of Sources. Authors must appropriately acknowledge previous research, community engagement studies, relevant methodologies, and intellectual contributions.

Data Accuracy and Retention. Authors must report information accurately and retain documentation supporting the implementation and evaluation of community service activities.

Funding and Conflicts of Interest. Authors must disclose relevant funding, sponsorship, institutional support, and financial or non-financial conflicts of interest.

Correction of Errors. Authors who discover significant errors in published articles must promptly notify the editorial team and cooperate in appropriate corrective actions.

5. Ethical Standards in Community Service and Community Engagement

Community Participation and Informed Consent. Community service activities must respect voluntary participation, community autonomy, and the rights of individuals involved. Appropriate consent or authorization must be obtained where required.

Respect for Community Values. Authors must respect local traditions, cultural values, social norms, community interests, and the dignity of participants. Activities must avoid discrimination, coercion, exploitation, and unnecessary harm.

Privacy and Confidentiality. Personal information, identifiable photographs, interviews, and sensitive community documentation must be collected, processed, and published responsibly, with appropriate consent or another valid legal and ethical basis.

Protection of Vulnerable Participants. Community service activities involving children, persons with disabilities, or other vulnerable groups must provide appropriate safeguards and permissions.

Ethical Approval. Authors must obtain relevant institutional, community, or ethics committee approvals when required by applicable regulations, institutional policies, or the nature of the activity.

Accurate Reporting of Community Impact. Authors must report community service outcomes honestly and proportionately. Claims concerning improvements in knowledge, skills, behavior, productivity, income, health, or welfare must be supported by appropriate evidence.

Community Intellectual Contributions. Contributions from community partners must be properly acknowledged. Traditional knowledge and community innovations must not be misappropriated or inaccurately represented.

6. Plagiarism and Publication Misconduct

RESONA prohibits plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, authorship manipulation, inappropriate image alteration, peer review manipulation, and other forms of publication misconduct.

Submitted manuscripts may undergo originality screening as part of the editorial process. Similarity reports must be interpreted carefully because a similarity percentage alone does not establish plagiarism.

The editorial team assesses suspected misconduct based on relevant evidence, the context of the allegation, and responses from the parties involved.

7. Handling Allegations of Publication Misconduct

Allegations of publication misconduct shall be addressed fairly, objectively, and confidentially through appropriate editorial procedures.

1. Initial Assessment: The editor examines the allegation and determines whether further investigation is necessary.
2. Request for Clarification: Relevant authors or individuals may be asked to provide explanations and supporting evidence.
3. Further Evaluation: The editorial team may consult independent experts, editorial board members, the publisher, or relevant institutions.
4. Editorial Decision: Actions may include manuscript rejection, revision, correction, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the findings.
5. Documentation: Appropriate records of the investigation and editorial decisions shall be maintained.

Individuals involved in an allegation should be provided a fair opportunity to respond before conclusions are reached, where appropriate.

8. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, editors, reviewers, and other parties involved in editorial decisions must disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably influence their professional judgment.

Potential conflicts include financial relationships, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, professional collaboration, academic competition, or other circumstances that could compromise impartiality.

The editorial team shall manage identified conflicts appropriately to protect editorial independence, fairness, and publication integrity.

9. Peer Review Ethics

RESONA is committed to maintaining a fair, confidential, independent, and academically rigorous peer review process. Submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial screening to evaluate relevance, completeness, originality, and compliance with journal policies.

Manuscripts meeting the initial requirements proceed to peer review in accordance with the journal's published Peer Review Process policy. Reviewers must have appropriate expertise and must not have significant conflicts of interest.

Reviewer recommendations inform editorial decisions, but final publication decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor. Publication charges or other financial considerations must not improperly influence editorial decisions.

10. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Corrections. A formal correction may be issued when a published article contains significant errors that require amendment but do not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.

Expressions of Concern. An expression of concern may be published when credible questions arise regarding the reliability or integrity of an article and the available evidence remains inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

Retractions. A published article may be retracted when sufficient evidence establishes that its findings are unreliable, serious ethical violations occurred, or the scholarly record has otherwise been substantially compromised.

Transparency. Correction, expression of concern, and retraction notices must identify the affected article and explain the reasons for the editorial action. Retracted articles should remain clearly identifiable within the scholarly record unless removal is necessary for legal, privacy, or compelling ethical reasons.

RESONA applies relevant COPE guidance when evaluating and implementing post-publication corrections or retractions.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may submit complaints regarding editorial procedures, peer review, publication misconduct, or published articles through the journal's official contact channels.

Complaints should clearly explain the concern and provide supporting evidence where available. The editorial team shall evaluate complaints fairly, objectively, and confidentially to the extent appropriate.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions when they can provide substantive evidence of factual errors, procedural irregularities, or legitimate grounds for reconsideration.

Appeals must be assessed by an editor or representative without a relevant conflict of interest. Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief shall be referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher or another authorized party.

12. Data Integrity, Availability, and Confidentiality

Authors are responsible for the integrity and accuracy of data, evaluation records, and supporting documentation presented in their manuscripts.

The editorial team may request relevant supporting materials to verify reported activities and findings. Authors should retain such materials for a reasonable period in accordance with applicable institutional and legal requirements.

Data availability must be balanced with privacy laws, confidentiality obligations, consent agreements, and the rights of community members. Sensitive or identifiable personal information must not be disclosed without appropriate authorization.

13. Use of Artificial Intelligence in Scholarly Publishing

RESONA recognizes that artificial intelligence tools may assist certain aspects of manuscript preparation, provided their use does not compromise academic integrity, originality, accuracy, confidentiality, or author accountability.

Authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content, including AI-assisted materials. Artificial intelligence systems must not be listed as authors because they cannot meet authorship responsibilities or assume accountability for published work.

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in manuscript writing, analysis, image creation, or other scholarly processes, including the tools used and their purposes where applicable.

Authors must verify AI-assisted information, references, analyses, and visual materials. Editors and reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality and must not disclose unpublished materials to external AI services without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

14. Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights

Authors must respect the intellectual property rights of other authors, institutions, communities, and relevant stakeholders. Necessary permissions must be obtained before reproducing copyrighted materials, including figures, photographs, tables, and illustrations.

Copyright ownership and the rights of authors and readers are governed by the journal's published Copyright Notice and Open Access Policy.

RESONA applies the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license as stated in its journal licensing policy. Reuse of published materials must comply with the applicable license terms, including appropriate attribution and sharing adaptations under the same license.

15. Commitment to Ethical Scholarly Publishing

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to responsible scholarly publishing, ethical community engagement, academic integrity, transparency, and continuous improvement in editorial quality.

The journal encourages authors, reviewers, editors, and readers to uphold honesty, fairness, accountability, confidentiality, respect, and professional responsibility throughout the scholarly communication process.

Questions, complaints, or concerns regarding publication ethics may be submitted through the journal's official contact information available on its website.

INDEXING AND ABSTRACTING

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat, published by Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia, is committed to enhancing the visibility, accessibility, and dissemination of scholarly publications in the field of community service and community empowerment.

RESONA is indexed, registered, or discoverable through the following academic databases and scholarly information platforms:

1. Google Scholar
   An academic search platform that facilitates the discovery and citation of scholarly publications.
2. GARUDA (Garba Rujukan Digital)
   Indonesia's national scholarly reference database, which provides access to scientific publications from Indonesian academic journals.
3. SINTA (Science and Technology Index)
   Indonesia's national scientific information and journal accreditation platform, which provides information on journal accreditation, scholarly performance, and citation indicators.
   View RESONA's SINTA Profile

RESONA continues to improve its editorial quality, publication standards, metadata management, and digital accessibility to support wider scholarly dissemination and future inclusion in reputable indexing and abstracting databases.

FOCUS AND SCOPE

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by the Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal provides an academic platform for disseminating the results of community service and community engagement activities that contribute to solving community problems, strengthening local capacities, transferring knowledge and technology, and supporting sustainable community development.

RESONA welcomes scholarly manuscripts based on the implementation, evaluation, and outcomes of community service programs. Contributions may involve interdisciplinary approaches and collaboration among academics, practitioners, community organizations, public institutions, and other relevant stakeholders. Manuscripts should demonstrate a clear connection between identified community needs, the activities undertaken, and the benefits achieved.

Focus

The primary focus of RESONA is the publication of evidence-based community service activities, including community empowerment, participatory assistance, training, mentoring, the application of appropriate technologies, and the dissemination of research-based innovations for community benefit. Priority is given to manuscripts that explain the engagement process and provide credible evidence of outputs, outcomes, or meaningful changes among the participating communities.

Scope

The journal covers, but is not limited to, the following areas of community service and engagement:

1. Social and Community Development. Community empowerment, social inclusion, strengthening community-based institutions, participatory development, social welfare initiatives, and sustainable local development.
2. Education. Community education, teacher and educator development, educational outreach, learning innovations, capacity-building programs, and the improvement of educational access and quality.
3. Science and Applied Technology. Knowledge and technology transfer, application of appropriate technologies, science-based community interventions, environmental practices, technical training, and innovation adoption by community partners.
4. Sports and Community Well-being. Community sports programs, physical activity promotion, sports education, recreational initiatives, and engagement activities supporting community well-being.
5. Language and Literacy. Language training, reading and writing literacy, digital and information literacy, community communication skills, and literacy-based empowerment programs.
6. Business and Economics. Micro, small, and medium enterprise (MSME) development, entrepreneurship assistance, financial literacy, marketing skills, business management, cooperative empowerment, and local economic development.

Types of Manuscripts Considered

RESONA primarily considers original scholarly articles reporting completed community service or community engagement activities. Manuscripts on the application of research findings or innovations are welcome when they document a substantive implementation process with community partners and evaluate its results.

Purely theoretical papers, stand-alone literature reviews, conventional research articles without an identifiable community service component, and descriptions of planned activities without implementation results are generally outside the journal's primary scope.

Essential Elements of Submitted Articles

To ensure relevance to the journal's mission, submitted manuscripts should clearly address the following elements:

1. Community Needs and Partner Context. Identification of the community partner, local conditions, problems, and the rationale for the activity.
2. Objectives and Engagement Approach. Clear objectives and a description of the involvement of community members or partner institutions.
3. Implementation Methods. A transparent account of activity stages, approaches, tools, materials, and relevant participation mechanisms.
4. Results and Evaluation. Evidence of outputs and outcomes, supported where appropriate by observations, evaluation instruments, participant feedback, or other suitable indicators.
5. Contribution and Sustainability. An explanation of practical benefits, limitations, opportunities for follow-up, and prospects for sustaining the activities or their outcomes.
6. Ethical Considerations. Appropriate respect for community participants, permissions, consent, privacy, and applicable ethical requirements.

Editorial Considerations

All submissions are evaluated for relevance to the journal's focus and scope, clarity of community needs, methodological transparency, quality of evidence, ethical compliance, and practical contribution. Acceptance is subject to editorial assessment and peer review in accordance with RESONA's published editorial policies.

RESONA encourages submissions from diverse disciplines and institutions, provided that the main contribution is grounded in genuine community service or community engagement and its documented outcomes.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal published by Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal is committed to maintaining a rigorous, transparent, fair, and independent peer review process to ensure the scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, ethical integrity, and practical contributions of published community service articles.

The peer review process is designed to evaluate the relevance of submitted manuscripts to the journal's focus and scope, particularly their contributions to community empowerment, capacity building, knowledge and technology transfer, and sustainable community development.

1. Peer Review Model

RESONA adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process. This system is intended to promote independent, objective, and unbiased scholarly evaluation.

Each manuscript that passes the initial editorial screening is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic or professional expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their competence, scholarly experience, and suitability for assessing the subject matter of the manuscript.

The editorial team is responsible for managing potential conflicts of interest and ensuring the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and review reports.

2. Manuscript Submission

Authors must submit manuscripts through the journal's Online Journal Systems (OJS) platform. Submitted manuscripts must comply with the journal's Focus and Scope, Author Guidelines, manuscript template, Publication Ethics, and other applicable editorial policies.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts are original, have not been published previously, and are not under consideration by another journal.

To support the double-blind review process, authors must remove identifying information from the manuscript file and follow the journal's instructions for preparing anonymized submissions.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript meets the basic requirements for further evaluation.

The initial screening includes the following aspects:

1. Relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.
2. Compliance with the Author Guidelines and manuscript template.
3. Originality and compliance with publication ethics.
4. Completeness of manuscript structure and supporting information.
5. Clarity of community problems, objectives, and partner involvement.
6. Appropriateness of community service implementation methods.
7. Adequacy of reported results and evaluation evidence.
8. Compliance with applicable ethical and confidentiality requirements.

Submitted manuscripts may undergo similarity screening using appropriate plagiarism detection software. Similarity reports are evaluated contextually and are not used as the sole basis for determining plagiarism.

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's minimum requirements may be returned for preliminary revision or rejected without external peer review.

4. Reviewer Selection and Assignment

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

Reviewer selection considers academic qualifications, professional expertise, publication experience, independence, and the absence of significant conflicts of interest.

Reviewers are expected to maintain manuscript confidentiality, provide objective and constructive evaluations, and complete their assessments within the period agreed upon with the editorial team.

Reviewers who have conflicts of interest or insufficient expertise must decline the review invitation and inform the editor accordingly.

5. Peer Review Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers evaluate submitted manuscripts based on their scholarly quality, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, and practical contributions to community service and community development.

The principal assessment criteria include:

1. Relevance and Originality: The manuscript addresses relevant community problems and demonstrates a meaningful contribution to community service knowledge or practice.
2. Community Problems and Objectives: The problems, needs, objectives, and characteristics of the community partners are clearly identified and adequately explained.
3. Methodological Appropriateness: The approaches, implementation stages, procedures, and evaluation methods are appropriate to the objectives of the community service activities.
4. Community Participation: The manuscript adequately describes community engagement, partner involvement, and participatory processes.
5. Results and Evidence: The reported outputs and outcomes are supported by appropriate data, observations, documentation, feedback, or evaluation indicators.
6. Community Benefits and Impact: The manuscript explains practical contributions to community knowledge, skills, empowerment, productivity, well-being, or other relevant outcomes without unsupported claims.
7. Sustainability and Practical Implications: The manuscript discusses opportunities for follow-up activities, continuity of outcomes, and potential application in other community contexts.
8. Ethical Compliance: Community service activities comply with relevant ethical standards, including informed consent, protection of participants, privacy, and appropriate acknowledgment of community contributions.
9. Clarity and Organization: The manuscript is logically structured, clearly written, and consistent with the journal's formatting requirements.
10. References and Scholarly Support: The manuscript appropriately acknowledges relevant literature and provides adequate scholarly support for its methods, discussion, and conclusions.

6. Reviewer Recommendations

After completing the evaluation, reviewers provide written comments, suggestions, and recommendations to assist the editor in determining the next stage of the editorial process.

Reviewer recommendations may include:

1. Accept Submission: The manuscript is suitable for publication without substantive revision.
2. Revisions Required: The manuscript requires revisions that may be evaluated by the editor without an additional external review round.
3. Resubmit for Review: The manuscript requires substantial revisions and further evaluation by reviewers.
4. Decline Submission: The manuscript does not meet the journal's scholarly, methodological, ethical, or scope requirements.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final publication decision is the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor.

7. Manuscript Revision and Re-evaluation

When revisions are requested, authors must carefully address the comments and recommendations provided by reviewers and editors.

Authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a clear explanation of the changes made. Where authors disagree with a recommendation, they should provide a reasoned academic justification.

The editor evaluates the revised manuscript and determines whether the revisions are sufficient or whether additional peer review is necessary.

A revised manuscript may undergo further review rounds until an appropriate editorial decision can be reached.

8. Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor makes the final decision based on the manuscript's scholarly quality, relevance to the journal, ethical compliance, reviewer recommendations, and the adequacy of revisions.

When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the editor may seek clarification, request additional revisions, or invite an additional independent reviewer before reaching a decision.

Editorial decisions must be fair, objective, and independent of financial considerations, institutional relationships, or other inappropriate influences.

Authors are informed of editorial decisions through the journal's OJS platform or official editorial communication channels.

9. Copyediting, Proofreading, and Publication

Manuscripts accepted for publication proceed to the production stage, which includes copyediting, layout preparation, proofreading, and verification of relevant publication metadata.

Authors may be requested to review the final proof to identify typographical, formatting, or other production errors before publication.

Accepted manuscripts are published in accordance with the journal's publication schedule and applicable editorial and publishing policies.

10. Confidentiality and Publication Ethics

All manuscripts undergoing peer review are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript information or use it for personal or professional advantage without appropriate authorization.

The peer review process follows the journal's Publication Ethics policy and relevant principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other ethical violations shall be handled in accordance with the journal's applicable ethical procedures.

Editors and reviewers must also protect manuscript confidentiality when using digital tools, including artificial intelligence services.

11. Transparency and Editorial Accountability

RESONA is committed to conducting peer review professionally, consistently, and transparently while respecting the confidentiality of the review process.

The editorial team is responsible for maintaining appropriate records of manuscript submissions, reviewer assignments, review reports, revisions, and editorial decisions through the journal's editorial management system.

Authors may monitor the status of their manuscripts through the OJS platform. Requests for clarification or appeals concerning editorial decisions may be submitted through the journal's official contact channels.

This peer review policy supports RESONA's commitment to publishing credible, ethically responsible, and evidence-based community service articles that contribute to sustainable community development.

PUBLICATION ETHICS

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal published by Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, transparency, fairness, and accountability throughout the editorial and publication processes.

RESONA provides an academic platform for disseminating scholarly articles reporting community service activities, community empowerment, knowledge and technology transfer, capacity building, and sustainable community development. The journal is committed to ensuring that all published articles are original, ethically responsible, methodologically sound, and supported by credible evidence of community engagement and its outcomes.

This publication ethics statement outlines the responsibilities of publishers, editors, reviewers, authors, and other stakeholders involved in scholarly publishing. The policy is developed with reference to the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly its Core Practices for responsible scholarly publishing.

1. Duties and Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher is responsible for maintaining the integrity, continuity, transparency, and independence of the scholarly publication process. The publisher supports editorial independence and ensures that publication decisions are based on academic merit, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's focus and scope.

The publisher is committed to:

1. Supporting the independence of editors in making scholarly publication decisions.
2. Ensuring fair, transparent, and accountable editorial procedures.
3. Supporting the investigation and resolution of alleged publication misconduct.
4. Maintaining the accessibility and preservation of published scholarly content.
5. Supporting the publication of corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary.
6. Ensuring transparency regarding publication fees, copyright provisions, and licensing policies.
7. Protecting the confidentiality of manuscripts, editorial communications, and unpublished scholarly materials.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Publication Decisions. The Editor-in-Chief and designated editors are responsible for determining which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication. Decisions are based on originality, scholarly contribution, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, relevance to community service, and the recommendations of qualified peer reviewers.

Fair and Objective Evaluation. Editors must evaluate manuscripts without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, institutional affiliation, political beliefs, or other irrelevant personal characteristics.

Confidentiality. Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, and editorial communications. Information may only be disclosed to individuals legitimately involved in the editorial and publication processes.

Conflicts of Interest. Editors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or professional relationships that could compromise their impartiality. Manuscripts involving significant conflicts of interest must be handled by another qualified and independent editor.

Editorial Independence. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by publication charges, institutional affiliations, financial considerations, personal relationships, or inappropriate external pressure.

Ethical Oversight. Editors are responsible for responding appropriately to credible allegations of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, authorship manipulation, unethical community engagement, and other publication misconduct.

Editorial Accountability. Manuscripts submitted by editorial board members must undergo an independent evaluation process. Editors must not participate in decisions concerning their own manuscripts or manuscripts presenting significant conflicts of interest.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Reviewers assist editors in evaluating the scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, clarity, ethical compliance, and community contributions of submitted manuscripts.

Objectivity. Reviews must be conducted objectively, professionally, and respectfully. Reviewer comments should provide constructive, evidence-based recommendations intended to improve manuscript quality.

Confidentiality. Manuscripts received for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not distribute, discuss, reproduce, or disclose manuscript contents to unauthorized parties.

Promptness. Reviewers who lack appropriate expertise or are unable to complete their assessments within the agreed period must promptly notify the editorial team.

Acknowledgment of Sources. Reviewers should identify relevant scholarly references that have not been appropriately acknowledged and report suspected substantial similarities with previously published works.

Conflicts of Interest. Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest and decline review assignments when their independence or impartiality may be compromised.

Ethical Responsibility. Reviewers should alert editors to suspected plagiarism, fabricated findings, misleading reporting, inappropriate use of community data, ethical violations, or other concerns affecting manuscript integrity.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Standards. Authors must provide accurate, objective, and sufficiently detailed accounts of community service activities, including community problems, program objectives, partner characteristics, implementation methods, participation, evaluation procedures, results, and limitations.

Originality and Plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts must represent original scholarly work. Authors must appropriately acknowledge all sources of ideas, methods, data, text, figures, and intellectual contributions.

Multiple and Concurrent Publication. Authors must not submit substantially identical manuscripts to multiple journals simultaneously. Previous publication or dissemination of related work must be appropriately disclosed.

Authorship and Contributions. Authorship must reflect substantial scholarly contributions, approval of the final manuscript, and accountability for the published work. Guest authorship, gift authorship, and ghost authorship are prohibited.

Accuracy of Community Service Outcomes. Authors must report the results of community service activities honestly. Claims regarding improvements in community knowledge, skills, productivity, behavior, welfare, or other outcomes must be supported by appropriate evaluation evidence.

Data Integrity. Authors must maintain accurate documentation supporting the reported community service activities and findings. Fabrication, falsification, selective misrepresentation, and inappropriate manipulation of evidence are prohibited.

Funding and Conflicts of Interest. Authors must disclose relevant funding sources, institutional support, sponsorships, and financial or non-financial conflicts of interest.

Correction of Errors. Authors who discover significant errors in submitted or published manuscripts must promptly inform the editorial team and cooperate in appropriate corrective actions.

5. Ethical Standards in Community Service and Community Engagement

As a journal specializing in community service, RESONA emphasizes ethical responsibility toward community partners, participants, beneficiaries, and other stakeholders involved in community engagement activities.

Community Participation and Informed Consent. Community service activities must respect voluntary participation, community autonomy, and the rights of individuals involved. Appropriate informed consent or authorization must be obtained where required by applicable regulations, institutional policies, or the nature of the activities.

Respect for Community Values. Authors must respect local traditions, cultural values, social norms, and the dignity of community members. Community service activities must avoid discrimination, exploitation, coercion, and unnecessary harm.

Privacy and Confidentiality. Personal information, identifiable photographs, interviews, and sensitive community documentation must be collected, processed, and published responsibly with appropriate consent or another valid legal and ethical basis.

Protection of Vulnerable Participants. Community service activities involving children, persons with disabilities, or other vulnerable populations must provide appropriate safeguards and permissions.

Ethical Approval. Authors must obtain relevant ethical, institutional, or community authorization where required by applicable laws, regulations, institutional policies, or the nature of the activity.

Accurate Reporting of Community Impact. Authors must present community service outcomes honestly and proportionately. Attendance records, activity documentation, or participant satisfaction alone must not be presented as evidence of sustained community impact without adequate supporting information.

Community Intellectual Contributions. Contributions from community partners must be acknowledged appropriately. Traditional knowledge, community innovations, and locally developed practices must not be misappropriated or inaccurately represented.

6. Plagiarism and Publication Misconduct

RESONA prohibits plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, authorship manipulation, citation manipulation, inappropriate image alteration, peer review manipulation, and other forms of publication misconduct.

Submitted manuscripts may undergo originality screening as part of the editorial evaluation process. Similarity reports must be interpreted carefully because a similarity percentage alone does not establish plagiarism.

The editorial team assesses suspected misconduct based on relevant evidence, the nature and context of the allegation, and explanations provided by the parties involved.

7. Handling Allegations of Publication Misconduct

RESONA is committed to addressing allegations of publication misconduct fairly, objectively, confidentially, and in accordance with responsible scholarly publishing principles.

The procedures for handling allegations include:

1. Initial Assessment: The editor examines the allegation and determines whether further investigation is justified.
2. Request for Clarification: Relevant authors or individuals may be requested to provide explanations and supporting documentation.
3. Further Evaluation: The editorial team may consult independent experts, editorial board members, the publisher, or relevant institutions.
4. Editorial Decision: Appropriate actions may include manuscript rejection, requests for correction, publication of an expression of concern, or article retraction.
5. Documentation: The editorial team maintains appropriate records of the investigation and its outcomes.

All relevant parties should be given a fair opportunity to respond before conclusions are reached, where appropriate. Serious allegations may require further examination or cooperation with the relevant institutions.

8. Conflicts of Interest

All authors, editors, reviewers, and other individuals involved in editorial decisions must disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably influence their professional judgment.

Conflicts of interest may arise from financial relationships, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, professional collaboration, academic competition, or other relevant circumstances.

The editorial team must manage identified conflicts appropriately to preserve fairness, editorial independence, and scholarly integrity.

9. Peer Review Ethics

RESONA is committed to maintaining a fair, independent, confidential, and academically rigorous peer review process. Submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial screening to assess relevance, originality, completeness, and compliance with the journal's policies.

Manuscripts meeting the initial requirements proceed to peer review in accordance with the journal's published Peer Review Process policy. Reviewers must possess appropriate expertise and must not have significant conflicts of interest.

Reviewer recommendations inform editorial decisions, but final publication decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor.

10. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Corrections. A formal correction may be issued when a published article contains significant errors that require amendment but do not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions.

Expressions of Concern. An expression of concern may be published when credible questions arise regarding an article's reliability or integrity and available evidence remains inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

Retractions. A published article may be retracted when sufficient evidence establishes that its findings are unreliable, serious ethical violations occurred, or the scholarly record has otherwise been substantially compromised.

Transparency. Corrections, expressions of concern, and retraction notices must clearly identify the affected article and explain the reasons for the editorial action.

Retracted articles should remain identifiable within the scholarly record and be clearly marked as retracted, except when removal is necessary for legal, privacy, or compelling ethical reasons.

RESONA refers to relevant COPE guidance when evaluating and implementing post-publication corrective actions.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may submit complaints concerning editorial decisions, peer review procedures, publication misconduct, or published articles through the journal's official contact channels.

Complaints should clearly describe the concern and include relevant supporting evidence where available. The editorial team shall assess complaints fairly and objectively while maintaining appropriate confidentiality.

Authors may appeal editorial decisions when they provide substantive reasons, evidence of factual errors, procedural irregularities, or other legitimate grounds for reconsideration.

Appeals must be considered by an editor or authorized representative without a relevant conflict of interest. Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief should be referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher.

12. Data Integrity, Availability, and Confidentiality

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of data, evaluation records, activity documentation, and other supporting materials presented in their manuscripts.

The editorial team may request relevant supporting information to verify reported community service activities and findings when necessary.

Data availability must be balanced with applicable privacy regulations, confidentiality obligations, consent agreements, and the rights of community members. Sensitive or identifiable personal information must not be disclosed without appropriate authorization.

13. Use of Artificial Intelligence in Scholarly Publishing

RESONA recognizes that artificial intelligence tools may assist certain aspects of manuscript preparation. However, their use must not compromise originality, accuracy, confidentiality, ethical compliance, or author accountability.

Authors remain fully responsible for all submitted content, including AI-assisted materials. Artificial intelligence systems must not be listed as authors because they cannot fulfill authorship responsibilities or assume accountability for published scholarly work.

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in manuscript preparation, analysis, image creation, or other scholarly processes, including the tools used and their purposes where applicable.

Authors must verify AI-assisted information, references, analyses, and visual materials. Editors and reviewers must protect manuscript confidentiality and must not disclose unpublished manuscript content to external AI services without appropriate authorization and safeguards.

14. Copyright and Intellectual Property Rights

Authors must respect the intellectual property rights of other authors, institutions, communities, and relevant stakeholders. Appropriate permissions must be obtained when reproducing copyrighted figures, photographs, tables, illustrations, or other protected materials.

Copyright ownership and publication rights are governed by the journal's published Copyright Notice and Open Access Policy.

RESONA applies the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license as stated in its journal licensing policy. Reuse of published materials must comply with the applicable license conditions, including appropriate attribution and sharing adaptations under the same license.

15. Commitment to Ethical Scholarly Publishing

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to responsible scholarly publishing, ethical community engagement, academic integrity, transparency, and continuous improvement in editorial quality.

The journal encourages authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other stakeholders to uphold the principles of honesty, fairness, accountability, confidentiality, respect, and professional responsibility throughout the scholarly communication process.

Questions, complaints, or concerns regarding publication ethics may be submitted through the journal's official contact information available on its website.

Ethical Guidelines and References

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Publication Ethics Resources and Guidelines. https://publicationethics.org
3. DOAJ. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/

PRIVACY STATEMENT

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Privacy Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to protecting the privacy, confidentiality, and personal information of authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and other users of its Online Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

The names, email addresses, and other personal information entered into this journal website are collected and processed for legitimate scholarly publishing purposes, including manuscript submission, editorial management, peer review, publication, academic communication, and journal administration.

Personal information will not be sold, used for unrelated commercial purposes, or disclosed to unauthorized parties. Information may be shared where necessary for legitimate journal operations, with appropriate service providers, or when required by applicable laws and regulations.

This Privacy Statement is developed with reference to responsible scholarly publishing practices and applicable Indonesian personal data protection regulations, including Law Number 27 of 2022 concerning Personal Data Protection.

2. Personal Information Collected

RESONA may collect personal information voluntarily provided by users when registering an account, submitting manuscripts, participating in peer review, communicating with the editorial team, or using other journal services.

Such information may include:

1. Full names and academic or professional titles, where applicable.
2. Email addresses and relevant contact information.
3. Institutional affiliations, departments, and countries.
4. Academic qualifications, research interests, and areas of expertise.
5. ORCID identifiers or other scholarly identifiers, where provided.
6. Manuscript submission information, author contributions, and publication metadata.
7. Reviewer assignments, review reports, and editorial communications.
8. Account registration information and user preferences.
9. Technical information generated through website access, such as IP addresses, browser information, and access logs, where collected by the system.

RESONA seeks to collect only information reasonably necessary for journal operations, scholarly communication, publication management, and the fulfillment of relevant legal or ethical responsibilities.

3. Purposes of Personal Data Processing

Personal information collected through RESONA is processed for purposes directly related to the journal's academic and publishing activities.

These purposes include:

1. Creating and managing user accounts on the OJS platform.
2. Receiving, processing, evaluating, and tracking manuscript submissions.
3. Communicating with authors, editors, reviewers, and other relevant stakeholders.
4. Assigning reviewers and coordinating the peer review process.
5. Managing editorial decisions, revisions, copyediting, proofreading, and publication.
6. Preparing and displaying appropriate author information and article metadata.
7. Supporting DOI registration, scholarly indexing, discoverability, and academic citation.
8. Maintaining publication records and fulfilling scholarly publishing obligations.
9. Investigating ethical concerns, complaints, appeals, or allegations of publication misconduct.
10. Maintaining website functionality, system security, and service quality.

Personal data shall be processed on an appropriate legal basis, which may include consent, the provision of requested journal services, compliance with legal obligations, or other lawful grounds recognized by applicable regulations.

4. Confidentiality of Manuscripts and Peer Review

RESONA recognizes the confidentiality of manuscripts submitted for editorial evaluation and peer review.

Submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial comments, correspondence, and unpublished supporting materials are treated as confidential information and may be accessed only by individuals authorized to participate in the relevant editorial process.

Reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript information to unauthorized parties or use such information for personal, professional, or commercial advantage.

Reviewer identities shall be protected in accordance with the journal's established peer review model and applicable editorial policies.

Confidential editorial information may be disclosed when necessary to investigate publication misconduct, comply with applicable laws, or fulfill other legitimate obligations, subject to appropriate safeguards.

5. Publication of Author Information

As an open-access scholarly journal, RESONA publishes selected author information as part of the official scholarly record.

Publicly available information may include author names, institutional affiliations, corresponding author email addresses, ORCID identifiers, article titles, abstracts, keywords, references, and other relevant publication metadata.

Such information is published to support scholarly attribution, transparency, academic communication, citation, and discoverability.

Published author information and article metadata may be distributed to legitimate scholarly information services, including DOI registration agencies, indexing databases, repositories, and academic discovery platforms.

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of their submitted personal and institutional information and should understand that information incorporated into the published scholarly record may remain publicly accessible.

6. Privacy of Community Service Participants

As a journal focusing on community service and community engagement, RESONA places particular importance on protecting the privacy, dignity, and rights of community partners, participants, and beneficiaries involved in reported activities.

Authors must ensure that personal data and identifiable information obtained during community service activities are collected, processed, stored, and published in accordance with applicable ethical standards and legal requirements.

Identifiable photographs, interviews, participant records, sensitive personal information, and community documentation must not be published without appropriate consent or another valid legal and ethical basis.

Additional safeguards are required where community engagement involves children, persons with disabilities, or other vulnerable individuals or groups.

Whenever appropriate, authors should anonymize or aggregate participant information to reduce privacy risks while preserving the accuracy and scholarly value of the reported community service outcomes.

Permission to conduct a community service activity does not automatically constitute permission to disclose personal information or publish identifiable photographs of participants.

7. Data Sharing and Third-Party Services

RESONA does not sell users' personal information to third parties or disclose personal data for unrelated marketing purposes.

Limited information may be shared with authorized service providers or relevant organizations when reasonably necessary for journal administration, website hosting, manuscript processing, DOI registration, scholarly indexing, digital preservation, or other legitimate publishing activities.

Public article metadata may be made available to academic indexing and discovery services to support the visibility, citation, and accessibility of published articles.

Where third-party services process personal information on behalf of the journal, appropriate measures should be taken to protect confidentiality, limit processing to legitimate purposes, and comply with applicable legal obligations.

Any transfer of personal data, including transfers involving services located outside Indonesia, shall be handled in accordance with applicable personal data protection requirements.

8. Data Security and Access Protection

RESONA is committed to implementing reasonable administrative, organizational, and technical safeguards to protect personal information against unauthorized access, misuse, accidental loss, inappropriate disclosure, alteration, or destruction.

Access to personal data and confidential editorial information should be restricted according to the responsibilities and authorization levels of journal personnel.

Users are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of their account credentials and should promptly notify the journal if they become aware of suspected unauthorized access or misuse of their accounts.

Although the journal seeks to maintain appropriate safeguards, no electronic information system can guarantee absolute security. Potential data protection incidents shall be assessed and addressed in accordance with applicable legal requirements and institutional procedures.

9. Cookies and Website Usage Information

The RESONA website may use cookies or similar technical mechanisms to support user authentication, maintain browsing sessions, remember user preferences, and facilitate essential website functions.

Technical information, including access logs and website usage statistics, may be processed for system administration, security monitoring, and service improvement, depending on the journal's active technical configuration.

Where third-party website analytics or visitor statistics services are used, their collection and processing of technical information may also be governed by the relevant service provider's privacy policies.

Users may adjust cookie preferences through their browser settings, although disabling essential cookies may affect certain website functions, including account login and manuscript submission.

10. Data Retention and Preservation

Personal information shall be retained only for as long as reasonably necessary to fulfill legitimate journal purposes, maintain the scholarly record, comply with legal obligations, or address relevant editorial and publication integrity matters.

Retention periods may vary according to the nature of the information, applicable institutional policies, legal requirements, and the operational needs of scholarly publishing.

Published articles and essential bibliographic metadata may be preserved for long-term scholarly access, citation, attribution, and academic recordkeeping.

Requests for deletion or modification of personal information shall be assessed in accordance with applicable laws and the journal's legitimate obligations to preserve accurate publication records.

11. Rights of Personal Data Subjects

Subject to applicable laws and relevant legal limitations, individuals whose personal data are processed by RESONA may exercise rights concerning their personal information.

These rights may include:

1. Requesting information about the collection and processing of their personal data.
2. Requesting access to personal information concerning them.
3. Requesting correction or updating of inaccurate or incomplete personal data.
4. Requesting deletion or termination of processing where legally applicable.
5. Withdrawing consent where consent constitutes the applicable legal basis for processing.
6. Requesting restriction of certain processing activities where permitted by law.
7. Submitting complaints concerning suspected inappropriate handling of personal information.
8. Exercising other rights provided under applicable Indonesian personal data protection legislation.

Requests concerning personal data shall be evaluated in accordance with applicable legal requirements, journal responsibilities, and the need to preserve the integrity of the scholarly publication record.

12. Privacy and Editorial Independence

RESONA is committed to protecting personal information while maintaining editorial independence, transparency, and accountability.

Personal information provided during journal registration, submission, or peer review shall not be used to discriminate against authors, reviewers, or other users based on irrelevant personal characteristics.

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly quality, originality, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.

Any use of personal information in publication ethics investigations shall be proportionate, confidential where appropriate, and consistent with applicable laws and editorial responsibilities.

13. Updates to the Privacy Statement

RESONA may review and update this Privacy Statement to reflect changes in applicable legislation, journal management practices, publishing standards, institutional requirements, or information technology systems.

The current version of the Privacy Statement shall be made available through the official RESONA website.

Users are encouraged to review this statement periodically to remain informed about the journal's practices concerning personal information and privacy protection.

14. Privacy Inquiries and Contact Information

Questions, requests, or concerns regarding the collection, processing, correction, or protection of personal information may be submitted through the journal's official contact channels.

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat
Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI)
Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo
Jl. Jend. Sudirman KM. 3, Binturu, Wara Selatan,
Palopo, South Sulawesi 91959, Indonesia.

Principal Contact: Puspa Sari
Email: puspasari@umpalopo.ac.id

Official Journal Contact Page:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

Requests concerning personal information will be reviewed through the appropriate journal or institutional procedures in accordance with applicable legal requirements.

15. Commitment to Privacy Protection

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to responsible personal data management, confidentiality, transparency, and respect for the privacy rights of all individuals participating in its scholarly publishing activities.

The journal seeks to balance the protection of personal information with the principles of open access, academic transparency, publication integrity, and the long-term preservation of scholarly knowledge.

The collection and use of personal information must remain consistent with legitimate scholarly publishing purposes, applicable ethical standards, and relevant personal data protection legislation.

ARTICLE RETRACTION POLICY

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy on Article Retraction

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining the accuracy, reliability, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly publication record. The journal recognizes that errors, ethical violations, or other serious concerns may be identified after an article has been published.

When a published article contains unreliable findings, substantial errors, serious publication misconduct, or significant ethical violations, the editorial team shall take appropriate corrective action to protect readers, authors, community partners, and the integrity of scholarly communication.

The journal's article retraction policy is developed with reference to the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly its Retraction Guidelines.

The primary purpose of article retraction is to correct the scholarly record and inform readers that the findings or conclusions of a published article should no longer be considered reliable. Retraction is not intended primarily as a punitive measure against authors.

2. Grounds for Article Retraction

An article published in RESONA may be considered for retraction when sufficient evidence establishes that its findings, conclusions, ethical integrity, or publication process have been seriously compromised.

Grounds for retraction may include, but are not limited to, the following circumstances:

1. Data Fabrication: The invention or presentation of fictitious data, community service activities, participants, evaluation findings, or program outcomes.
2. Data Falsification: The manipulation, alteration, or intentional misrepresentation of data, documentation, photographs, evaluation results, or other supporting evidence.
3. Plagiarism: Substantial unauthorized reproduction or appropriation of another person's scholarly work, ideas, text, methods, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment.
4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Substantial publication of previously published material without appropriate attribution, permission, disclosure, or scholarly justification.
5. Unreliable Findings: Major methodological errors, analytical mistakes, or other serious deficiencies, whether intentional or unintentional, that invalidate the principal findings or conclusions.
6. Authorship Misconduct: Serious authorship misrepresentation, identity fraud, fictitious authorship, or other authorship violations that compromise publication integrity.
7. Unethical Community Engagement: Serious violations of ethical standards involving community participants, partner institutions, vulnerable groups, privacy, informed consent, or community rights.
8. Misrepresentation of Community Service Activities: False claims regarding program implementation, community participation, training activities, technological applications, community benefits, or measurable outcomes.
9. Compromised Peer Review: Evidence that the peer review or editorial process was manipulated or otherwise seriously compromised.
10. Other Serious Ethical Violations: Significant undisclosed conflicts of interest, unauthorized use of protected materials or data, or other violations that undermine the reliability or integrity of the published article.

A retraction decision must be based on the seriousness and reliability implications of the identified problem rather than the existence of a minor error or an unsubstantiated allegation.

3. Retraction Requests and Reporting

Concerns regarding the reliability, originality, or ethical integrity of published articles may be raised by authors, editors, reviewers, readers, community partners, institutions, or other relevant parties.

Individuals wishing to report a concern should communicate with the editorial team through the journal's official contact channels and provide sufficient information to identify the affected article and explain the allegation.

A report should include, where available:

1. The title, author names, publication year, and DOI or URL of the article concerned.
2. A clear description of the suspected error, misconduct, or ethical violation.
3. Relevant documentation or evidence supporting the concern.
4. Contact information for follow-up communication, where appropriate.

The editorial team shall consider credible reports in good faith and protect confidential information to the extent appropriate. Allegations will not automatically result in retraction without appropriate evaluation.

4. Investigation and Evaluation Procedures

RESONA shall evaluate credible concerns regarding published articles through a fair, objective, confidential, and evidence-based process.

The investigation procedure may include the following stages:

1. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor reviews the reported concern and determines whether further investigation is warranted.
2. Evidence Examination: The editorial team examines relevant manuscript records, published materials, editorial correspondence, data, or other supporting documentation.
3. Author Notification: The corresponding author and other relevant authors are informed of the substantive concerns and invited to provide explanations or supporting evidence.
4. Independent Consultation: When necessary, the editorial team may consult independent experts, qualified editorial board members, the publisher, or relevant institutional authorities.
5. Ethical Assessment: The editorial team evaluates the seriousness of the concern, its effect on the reliability of the article, and the need for corrective action.
6. Final Editorial Determination: The Editor-in-Chief or another authorized, independent editor determines the appropriate action based on the available evidence and applicable publication ethics principles.

Authors shall normally be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to allegations before a final decision is made. However, the absence of an author response does not prevent an editorial decision when sufficient reliable evidence is available.

Where an allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief or involves a significant conflict of interest, the matter shall be handled by an independent editor or an appropriate authorized representative of the publisher.

5. Editorial Decisions and Corrective Actions

Following the evaluation of a reported concern, RESONA may implement one or more appropriate editorial actions depending on the nature, seriousness, and available evidence of the issue.

5.1. Correction

A correction may be issued when an article contains a significant error that can be rectified without invalidating its principal findings or conclusions. The correction notice shall explain the error and identify the affected article.

5.2. Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be published when credible questions arise regarding the reliability or ethical integrity of an article but an investigation remains unresolved, incomplete, or inconclusive.

An Expression of Concern does not automatically constitute a determination of misconduct. It is intended to inform readers of unresolved issues that may affect their interpretation of the published work.

5.3. Article Retraction

A retraction shall be considered when sufficient evidence demonstrates that an article contains seriously unreliable findings, substantial errors, or significant ethical violations that compromise its validity or integrity.

5.4. No Further Editorial Action

Where the allegation is unsupported or the reported problem does not materially affect the reliability or integrity of the article, the editorial team may determine that no formal correction or retraction is necessary.

6. Retraction Decision and Editorial Independence

The final decision to retract a published article rests with the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor who has no relevant conflict of interest. The publisher may provide administrative, technical, or institutional support during the process.

Retraction decisions must be based on evidence, publication ethics, the reliability of the scholarly record, and the journal's editorial policies.

The decision must not be influenced by publication fees, institutional affiliations, professional status, personal relationships, financial considerations, or inappropriate external pressure.

Author agreement is desirable where possible but is not an absolute requirement for retraction when sufficient evidence justifies the editorial decision.

The editorial team shall seek to resolve cases without unnecessary delay. When a substantial investigation is required, an Expression of Concern may be considered to inform readers while the matter remains unresolved.

7. Publication of Retraction Notices

When an article is formally retracted, RESONA shall publish a clear, accessible, and appropriately identified Retraction Notice on the journal's official website.

The Retraction Notice should include:

1. A clear heading indicating that the publication is a Retraction Notice.
2. The complete title and author information of the affected article.
3. The original publication details, including volume, issue, year, and DOI, where applicable.
4. A clear explanation of the reasons for retraction.
5. Identification of the party responsible for issuing the notice, such as the editor, authors, or publisher.
6. The date on which the retraction notice is published.
7. A direct link to the original article.
8. Relevant information concerning author agreement or disagreement, where appropriate and verified.

The notice shall avoid unnecessary defamatory statements, unsupported allegations, or disclosure of confidential personal information.

Retraction notices must be freely accessible to readers and clearly linked to the affected articles to ensure transparency and accurate scholarly interpretation.

8. Treatment of Retracted Articles

RESONA recognizes that maintaining an identifiable scholarly record is essential for transparency, accountability, and responsible academic communication.

Retracted articles shall generally remain accessible through the journal's website but must be clearly identified as RETRACTED.

Where technically feasible, the retraction status shall be displayed prominently on the article landing page, abstract, full-text HTML, and PDF document.

A clear notice shall link the original article to the corresponding Retraction Notice, and the Retraction Notice shall link back to the original article.

The original bibliographic record, including the DOI where applicable, should be preserved to maintain transparency and prevent confusion in scholarly citation and indexing.

Complete removal of article content shall be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as serious legal issues, privacy violations, disclosure of sensitive information, or other compelling ethical reasons.

9. Notification to Indexing and DOI Services

When an article has been retracted, the editorial team shall take reasonable steps to ensure that the article's publication status is accurately reflected in the journal's records and relevant scholarly information services.

Where supported by the applicable services and technical infrastructure, the journal should update relevant DOI metadata and notify indexing, abstracting, or scholarly discovery platforms of the retraction.

Retraction-related metadata and links should be maintained consistently to help readers, researchers, and indexing services identify the article's current publication status.

10. Authors' Responsibilities in Retraction Cases

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, ethical compliance, and integrity of their published works.

Authors who identify significant errors, misleading information, or serious ethical concerns affecting their published articles must promptly notify the editorial team.

During an investigation, authors are expected to cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries and provide relevant explanations, original data, activity documentation, or other supporting information where appropriate.

Authors may request a correction or retraction when substantial errors or ethical concerns are identified. Such requests shall be evaluated by the editorial team in accordance with the journal's policies and applicable publication ethics principles.

Authors may also submit an appeal or request reconsideration when they provide substantive evidence of procedural irregularities, factual errors, or other legitimate grounds for review.

11. Specific Considerations for Community Service Publications

As a journal dedicated to community service and community engagement, RESONA recognizes that the integrity of published articles depends not only on academic accuracy but also on the authenticity and ethical conduct of activities involving community partners and participants.

Particular attention shall be given to allegations involving:

1. Community service activities reported as completed when they were not actually implemented.
2. Fabricated participation records, partner involvement, attendance data, or activity documentation.
3. Manipulated evaluation results or unsupported claims of improvements in community knowledge, skills, productivity, or welfare.
4. Unauthorized publication of identifiable participant photographs or sensitive community information.
5. Misrepresentation of community partners, local innovations, traditional knowledge, or community-generated products.
6. Serious ethical violations affecting the rights, safety, dignity, or privacy of participants and beneficiaries.

The editorial team shall consider the seriousness of such issues and their implications for the reliability, ethical integrity, and scholarly contribution of the published article.

Not every error or disagreement concerning community service outcomes requires retraction. The appropriate corrective action shall depend on the available evidence and whether the problem materially compromises the article's reliability or integrity.

12. Appeals and Complaints

Authors and other relevant parties may submit substantiated appeals or complaints concerning retraction decisions through the journal's official contact channels.

An appeal should identify the affected article, explain the grounds for reconsideration, and provide relevant supporting evidence.

Appeals shall be evaluated fairly and, where appropriate, by an editor or independent representative who was not directly involved in the original decision.

The submission of an appeal does not automatically suspend, invalidate, or reverse a retraction decision.

13. Confidentiality and Documentation

RESONA shall maintain appropriate records relating to allegations, investigations, author correspondence, supporting evidence, editorial decisions, and published corrective notices.

Information obtained during an investigation shall be handled confidentially to the extent appropriate, while ensuring that published notices provide sufficient transparency regarding the reasons for corrective action.

The editorial team shall protect the personal information of authors, reviewers, complainants, community participants, and other relevant parties in accordance with the journal's Privacy Statement and applicable legal requirements.

14. Policy Consistency and Ethical Guidance

This Article Retraction Policy forms part of RESONA's commitment to publication integrity and must be interpreted consistently with the journal's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Author Guidelines, Copyright Notice, and Privacy Statement.

The journal shall refer to the relevant principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including current guidance on retractions, corrections, and expressions of concern, when addressing post-publication integrity concerns.

RESONA may review and update this policy as necessary to reflect developments in publication ethics, scholarly publishing practices, and applicable institutional or legal requirements.

15. Official Contact for Retraction Concerns

Reports, requests, complaints, or appeals concerning the reliability or ethical integrity of articles published in RESONA may be submitted through the journal's official contact page.

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat
Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI)
Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo
Palopo, South Sulawesi, Indonesia.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

The editorial team shall evaluate communications concerning article retractions through appropriate editorial procedures and respond in accordance with the journal's responsibilities and applicable publication ethics principles.

Ethical Guidelines and References

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Retraction Guidelines (2025). https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Scientific Misconduct, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

PUBLICATION SCHEDULE

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal published by the Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal is published regularly twice a year (biannually), in June and December.

1. Publication Frequency

RESONA follows a regular publication schedule consisting of two issues per year. Each annual volume contains two issues, published according to the following schedule:

2. Manuscript Submission

RESONA accepts manuscript submissions throughout the year. Authors may submit their manuscripts at any time through the journal's Online Journal Systems (OJS) platform, provided that the submissions comply with the journal's Focus and Scope, Author Guidelines, manuscript template, and Publication Ethics.

There is no guarantee that a manuscript submitted during a particular month will be published in the immediately following issue. Publication depends on the successful completion of editorial screening, peer review, revisions, and production procedures.

3. Editorial and Peer Review Process

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their relevance, originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, and conformity with the journal's submission requirements.

Manuscripts that meet the initial editorial requirements proceed to peer review in accordance with the journal's published Peer Review Process policy.

The time required for editorial evaluation and peer review may vary depending on manuscript quality, reviewer availability, the extent of revisions required, and the responsiveness of authors.

The editorial team is committed to managing submissions efficiently while maintaining the academic quality, objectivity, and integrity of the review process.

4. Acceptance and Issue Assignment

Manuscripts accepted for publication are assigned to an appropriate forthcoming issue based on the journal's publication schedule, editorial readiness, and availability of publication space.

The final assignment of accepted manuscripts to a particular issue is determined by the editorial team.

Acceptance of a manuscript does not automatically guarantee publication in a specific issue unless the publication schedule has been confirmed by the editorial team.

5. Copyediting and Publication

Following acceptance, manuscripts proceed through copyediting, layout preparation, proofreading, and verification of bibliographic metadata before publication.

The corresponding author may be requested to review the final proof to ensure the accuracy of the published information.

Articles are published through the official journal website in accordance with the designated issue schedule.

6. Publication Regularity and Transparency

RESONA is committed to maintaining consistent and timely publication in June and December each year. The journal strives to ensure that all published articles have completed the required editorial evaluation, peer review, and production processes.

Any substantial changes to the publication schedule shall be communicated through the official journal website when necessary.

The journal's publication history and previous issues can be accessed through its official archive:

https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/issue/archive

7. Contact and Publication Inquiries

Authors seeking information about manuscript status, editorial decisions, or publication scheduling may communicate with the editorial team through the journal's official contact channels.

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat
Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI)
Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo
Palopo, South Sulawesi, Indonesia.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. Copyright Ownership

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scientific journal committed to protecting authors' intellectual property rights and promoting the responsible dissemination of scholarly knowledge.

Authors who publish their articles in RESONA retain the copyright of their scholarly works. Copyright ownership remains with the authors and is not transferred to the journal or publisher as a condition of publication.

By submitting and publishing an article in RESONA, authors grant the journal the right of first publication and a non-exclusive right to publish, reproduce, distribute, and make the published work accessible in accordance with the journal's open-access policy and applicable licensing terms.

2. Licensing Policy

All articles published in RESONA are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).

This license permits readers and other users to share, copy, redistribute, adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the published material in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that the applicable licensing requirements are fulfilled.

The Creative Commons license does not transfer copyright ownership from authors to the journal or its publisher.

License Information:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

3. Terms and Conditions of Reuse

Under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, users are permitted to reuse published materials subject to the following conditions:

1. Attribution: Users must provide appropriate credit to the original authors, acknowledge the initial publication in RESONA, provide a link to the license, and indicate whether changes have been made.
2. ShareAlike: If users remix, transform, or build upon the published material, they must distribute their contributions under the same license as the original material.
3. No Additional Restrictions: Users must not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from exercising the permissions granted by the license.
4. Responsible Reuse: Users must not imply that the original authors, journal, or publisher endorse their reuse or adaptation unless explicit authorization has been obtained.

The license does not eliminate the need to respect applicable privacy rights, moral rights, publicity rights, or intellectual property rights in materials that are not covered by the license.

4. Authors' Rights

Authors publishing in RESONA retain the right to use and disseminate their scholarly works in accordance with the journal's publishing agreement and Creative Commons license.

Authors may:

1. Retain copyright ownership of their published articles.
2. Share and distribute their published articles through personal websites, academic profiles, and institutional or subject-based repositories.
3. Use their published articles for educational, scholarly, and professional purposes.
4. Include their published works in theses, dissertations, books, teaching materials, or other scholarly publications, subject to applicable licensing and publication requirements.
5. Enter into additional non-exclusive distribution arrangements, provided that such arrangements remain consistent with the applicable Creative Commons license.
6. Reuse and develop their published research or community service findings in subsequent scholarly works with appropriate acknowledgment of the original publication.

When redistributing or reusing a published article, authors should acknowledge RESONA as the venue of first publication and provide the article's DOI or permanent URL where available.

5. Rights of the Journal and Publisher

RESONA is granted the right of first publication and the necessary non-exclusive publishing permissions to make accepted articles available through its official website and relevant scholarly dissemination services.

The journal and publisher may undertake editorial production, copyediting, formatting, metadata management, DOI registration, indexing, distribution, and digital preservation in accordance with the applicable publication agreement and licensing terms.

The copyright in the original design, visual identity, layout, and other publisher-owned elements of the RESONA website remains with the publisher or other applicable rights holders.

Such website elements are not automatically included in the Creative Commons license applicable to published scholarly articles.

6. Open Access and Article Distribution

RESONA supports open access to scholarly publications to facilitate the dissemination, accessibility, and reuse of knowledge resulting from community service and community engagement activities.

Published articles are made available through the journal's official website without subscription barriers.

Readers may access, download, copy, share, and reuse published articles in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors are encouraged to disseminate their published articles through appropriate scholarly communication channels to increase their visibility, accessibility, and potential contributions to community development.

7. Self-Archiving and Institutional Repositories

RESONA permits authors to deposit and disseminate their scholarly works through institutional repositories, subject-based repositories, personal academic websites, and other legitimate scholarly platforms.

Authors may share appropriate manuscript versions and the published Version of Record, provided that the rights of third parties are respected and the applicable licensing requirements are fulfilled.

When depositing the published version, authors should provide complete bibliographic information, including the article title, author names, journal name, publication year, volume, issue, and DOI or permanent article URL where available.

Repository distribution must acknowledge RESONA as the journal of first publication and must not misrepresent the article's publication status or licensing conditions.

8. Third-Party Copyrighted Materials

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all materials included in their manuscripts comply with applicable intellectual property laws and publication ethics requirements.

When manuscripts contain copyrighted materials owned by third parties, including photographs, illustrations, figures, tables, questionnaires, maps, or other protected content, authors must obtain appropriate permission unless the intended use is otherwise legally permitted.

Authors must provide accurate acknowledgment of the original sources and comply with any applicable terms of use.

Third-party materials that are excluded from the article's Creative Commons license must be clearly identified through appropriate credit lines or licensing statements.

The publication of an article under CC BY-SA 4.0 does not automatically authorize unrestricted reuse of third-party materials that are not covered by that license.

9. Copyright and Community Service Documentation

As a journal focusing on community service and community engagement, RESONA recognizes the importance of protecting the rights and interests of community partners, participants, and other stakeholders involved in published activities.

Authors must ensure that photographs, videos, interviews, community-generated materials, traditional knowledge, and other documentation are collected and published ethically and with appropriate authorization.

Permission to conduct a community service activity does not automatically grant permission to publish identifiable personal information, photographs, or materials belonging to community participants or partner institutions.

Authors must appropriately acknowledge the contributions of community partners and respect intellectual property rights associated with locally developed innovations, traditional knowledge, and community-generated products.

Where required, authors must obtain informed consent, institutional authorization, or other relevant permissions before including identifiable or protected materials in published manuscripts.

10. Authors' Responsibilities and Copyright Compliance

By submitting a manuscript to RESONA, authors affirm that they have the necessary rights and permissions to submit the work and authorize its publication under the journal's applicable licensing conditions.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts do not unlawfully infringe copyright, violate confidentiality obligations, or contain unauthorized reproduction of third-party intellectual property.

All listed authors must approve the submitted manuscript and agree to the journal's applicable copyright and licensing policies.

Suspected copyright infringement, plagiarism, unauthorized reproduction, or other intellectual property violations shall be addressed in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Article Retraction policies.

11. Copyright Complaints and Permissions

Questions, complaints, or concerns regarding copyright ownership, licensing, permitted reuse, or possible intellectual property infringement may be submitted through the journal's official contact channels.

The editorial team will assess relevant concerns and may request supporting documentation, clarification, or appropriate authorization before determining whether corrective action is necessary.

Where a copyright concern affects a published article, the journal may issue an appropriate correction, clarification, or other editorial notice in accordance with its publication ethics procedures.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

12. Copyright and Licensing Statement

Authors who publish in RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat retain the copyright of their articles and grant the journal the right of first publication. Published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0), allowing sharing, redistribution, and adaptation, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate attribution is given and adaptations are distributed under the same license.

The copyright of the journal website's layout, design, and publisher-owned visual elements remains with the publisher or other applicable rights holders.

This Copyright Notice forms part of RESONA's commitment to open access, intellectual property protection, ethical scholarly publishing, and the responsible dissemination of knowledge for community benefit.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
CC BY-SA 4.0 License

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat charges an Article Processing Charge (APC) of IDR 1,000,000 per accepted article, payable after manuscript acceptance. The fee supports editorial and publication processing, article formatting, and Digital Object Identifier (DOI) registration and maintenance.

All published articles are freely accessible to readers without subscription or download fees.

Payment Information
Bank: Bank Muamalat
Account Number: 8020777888
Account Name: Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo

Publication fees do not influence peer-review outcomes or editorial decisions. Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their academic quality, originality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's focus and scope.

For payment inquiries, please contact the RESONA Editorial Office.

GENERATIVE AI POLICY

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat recognizes that Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) technologies, including large language models, AI-powered writing assistants, and generative image systems, may support scholarly communication, manuscript preparation, and community service activities.

The journal permits responsible and transparent use of GenAI technologies, provided that their application does not compromise originality, accuracy, academic integrity, confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or ethical responsibility.

This policy applies to authors, peer reviewers, editors, and editorial staff involved in the preparation, submission, evaluation, and publication of manuscripts.

The policy is developed with reference to the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) concerning responsible use of AI-assisted technologies in scholarly publishing.

Generative AI must support, rather than replace, independent human intellectual contributions, critical analysis, professional judgment, and accountability for scholarly publications.

2. Scope and Definition of Generative AI

Generative Artificial Intelligence refers to computational systems capable of generating new content, including text, images, computer code, audio, video, or other materials, based on user instructions, training data, and algorithmic processes.

For the purposes of this policy, GenAI includes large language models, conversational AI systems, AI-assisted writing platforms, generative image applications, and other technologies used to generate or substantially transform scholarly content.

Examples may include ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and similar technologies. The inclusion of these examples does not constitute an endorsement of any particular platform.

This policy primarily concerns generative technologies. Conventional statistical software, reference management applications, and non-generative analytical tools remain subject to the journal's general requirements concerning methodological transparency, accuracy, and research integrity.

3. Permitted Uses of Generative AI

Authors may use GenAI tools to support appropriate scholarly activities, provided that all generated or modified content is independently reviewed, verified, and approved by the authors.

Permitted uses may include:

1. Language Editing: Improving grammar, spelling, punctuation, clarity, readability, and sentence structure without materially altering the scholarly meaning.
2. Translation Assistance: Supporting translation between languages, provided that the authors verify terminology, accuracy, contextual meaning, and completeness.
3. Manuscript Organization: Assisting with outlines, document structure, formatting, and presentation in accordance with the journal's Author Guidelines.
4. Literature Discovery: Identifying potentially relevant scholarly sources, provided that authors independently verify the existence, accuracy, relevance, and bibliographic details of all references.
5. Analytical Assistance: Supporting coding, qualitative categorization, data organization, or analytical procedures when the use of GenAI is methodologically justified, verified, and transparently reported.
6. Technical Assistance: Supporting the development or checking of computer code, formulas, instructional materials, or technical documentation, subject to appropriate validation.
7. Educational Material Preparation: Supporting the development of training materials, learning resources, or community service instructional content, provided that the materials are accurate, appropriate, and reviewed by qualified individuals.

The use of GenAI for substantive content generation, analysis, interpretation, translation, or methodological activities must be disclosed in accordance with this policy.

4. Prohibited Uses of Generative AI

RESONA prohibits the use of GenAI technologies for activities that compromise scholarly integrity, fabricate evidence, conceal misconduct, or misrepresent the implementation and outcomes of community service programs.

Prohibited practices include:

1. Generating fictitious community service activities, participant groups, partner institutions, locations, or implementation records.
2. Fabricating or falsifying survey data, interview responses, observations, evaluation findings, attendance records, or community service outcomes.
3. Producing fabricated references, nonexistent publications, incorrect bibliographic information, or invalid Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs).
4. Creating or modifying photographs to falsely represent actual community service activities, participants, or implementation outcomes.
5. Presenting AI-generated interviews, participant feedback, or simulated field data as authentic empirical evidence.
6. Using GenAI to conceal plagiarism, reproduce copyrighted materials without authorization, or misappropriate intellectual contributions.
7. Submitting AI-generated arguments, interpretations, or conclusions without meaningful human verification, evaluation, and intellectual responsibility.
8. Uploading confidential manuscript materials, personal information, or sensitive community data to unauthorized GenAI platforms.
9. Using GenAI to manipulate the peer review process, fabricate reviewer identities, or produce misleading editorial communications.

Generated materials must not be presented as authentic evidence unless their origin, nature, and purpose are clearly identified and their use is ethically and methodologically appropriate.

5. Authorship and Human Accountability

Generative AI systems must not be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to RESONA.

Authorship requires substantial scholarly contributions, approval of the manuscript, responsibility for its content, and accountability for the integrity of the published work.

GenAI systems cannot fulfill these responsibilities or independently manage intellectual property obligations, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics requirements.

All listed authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, validity, ethical compliance, and scholarly integrity of their manuscripts, including content developed with GenAI assistance.

Authors must ensure that GenAI-assisted content is critically examined, appropriately revised, supported by authentic evidence, and consistent with the journal's publication standards.

6. Mandatory Disclosure of Generative AI Use

RESONA requires authors to disclose substantive use of Generative AI during manuscript preparation, scholarly writing, literature synthesis, translation, analysis, interpretation, image generation, or other activities affecting the manuscript's content.

The disclosure must identify the following information:

1. The name of the GenAI tool or platform used.
2. The model or version, where identifiable.
3. The purpose of using the technology.
4. The manuscript sections or scholarly activities in which GenAI was applied.
5. The procedures undertaken by the authors to verify, validate, revise, and take responsibility for GenAI-assisted outputs.

Authors must include a separate statement entitled Declaration of Generative AI Use immediately before the References section.

When GenAI is used as part of data processing, analysis, evaluation, or another methodological procedure, its use must also be described in the Methods section with sufficient detail to support scholarly transparency.

Routine spelling correction, basic grammar checking, and similar automated functions that do not materially generate or transform scholarly content do not require a separate declaration. However, substantive content generation, rewriting, translation, analysis, and interpretation must be disclosed.

Authors must also disclose relevant GenAI use during submission through the journal's submission notes or another mechanism designated by the editorial team.

7. Declaration of Generative AI Use

All manuscripts submitted to RESONA must include an appropriate declaration concerning the use of Generative AI.

A. Declaration When Generative AI Has Been Used

Declaration of Generative AI Use: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of Generative AI tool and version, if available] for [specific purpose and scope of use]. All GenAI-assisted outputs were critically reviewed, verified, and edited by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of the manuscript.

B. Declaration When Generative AI Has Not Been Used

Declaration of Generative AI Use: The authors declare that no Generative Artificial Intelligence tools were used in the substantive preparation, writing, analysis, interpretation, or generation of content for this manuscript.

Authors must select the declaration that accurately reflects their manuscript preparation process and must not provide false or misleading information.

Where appropriate, the editorial team may request additional clarification concerning the nature, extent, or verification of GenAI-assisted content.

8. Generative AI in Community Service Activities

RESONA recognizes that Generative AI may be used as part of legitimate community service interventions, including digital literacy training, educational assistance, entrepreneurship development, marketing support, technology transfer, and community empowerment programs.

When GenAI is implemented as part of a community service activity, authors must clearly explain the technology employed, its intended purpose, the target community, the implementation process, and relevant ethical safeguards.

Authors must distinguish between the use of GenAI as an intervention tool and its use in preparing the scientific manuscript.

Where GenAI forms part of the community intervention, the Methods section should describe:

1. The GenAI platform or technology applied.
2. The objectives of its application in the community service program.
3. The characteristics of participating community partners or beneficiaries.
4. The implementation stages and forms of participant involvement.
5. The procedures used to ensure responsible and ethical technology use.
6. The indicators and methods used to evaluate outcomes.
7. Relevant limitations, risks, and sustainability considerations.

Claims concerning improved knowledge, skills, productivity, efficiency, entrepreneurship, or community welfare must be supported by authentic and appropriately collected evidence.

9. Generative AI-Generated Images and Visual Materials

Photographs and visual documentation submitted as evidence of community service activities must accurately represent events, participants, locations, and implementation outcomes.

The use of GenAI to fabricate documentary photographs, construct fictitious participant interactions, or manipulate visual evidence in a misleading manner is strictly prohibited.

GenAI-generated illustrations, diagrams, conceptual models, and other explanatory visual materials may be considered when their use is relevant, ethically appropriate, and clearly disclosed.

Such materials must be identified as AI-generated or AI-assisted in the relevant figure caption or accompanying explanation.

Authors must distinguish between illustrative content and authentic empirical evidence. AI-generated illustrations must not be presented as photographs or documentation of actual community service activities.

Authors remain responsible for verifying the accuracy, appropriateness, intellectual property status, and ethical implications of all GenAI-assisted visual materials.

10. Generative AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts, unpublished data, reviewer reports, and editorial correspondence.

Reviewers must not upload submitted manuscripts, manuscript excerpts, confidential supporting materials, or unpublished review information to public or unauthorized GenAI services.

The use of GenAI to assist peer review requires prior authorization from the editorial team and appropriate safeguards for manuscript confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

Reviewers must conduct independent scholarly assessments of manuscript originality, methodological quality, ethical compliance, clarity, and contribution to community service.

GenAI-generated evaluations must not replace the reviewer's independent academic judgment.

Any authorized substantive GenAI assistance used during peer review must be disclosed to the editorial team, including the tool used and the purpose of its application.

Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, validity, and professionalism of their review reports.

11. Generative AI Use by Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff may use appropriate digital technologies to support editorial administration, language improvement, metadata preparation, and other publication management activities, provided that such use complies with confidentiality, privacy, and publication ethics requirements.

Confidential manuscript content, reviewer identities, review reports, and unpublished editorial correspondence must not be uploaded to unauthorized external GenAI platforms.

Where GenAI is used in editorial or production workflows, the journal must maintain human supervision, ensure the reliability of generated outputs, and provide appropriate transparency to affected authors.

GenAI systems must not independently determine manuscript acceptance, rejection, reviewer selection, or other substantive editorial decisions.

Final editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor and must be based on scholarly merit, ethical compliance, appropriate peer review, and independent human judgment.

12. Accuracy, Privacy, and Data Protection

All individuals using GenAI in connection with RESONA must take appropriate measures to protect the accuracy, confidentiality, security, and lawful processing of scholarly and personal information.

Authors must verify all references, quotations, factual claims, numerical results, analytical interpretations, and other information generated or modified with GenAI assistance.

GenAI-generated references must not be included in a manuscript unless the cited publications and their bibliographic details have been independently verified.

Sensitive community information, personal health records, identifiable participant data, confidential institutional documents, and unpublished scholarly materials must not be entered into GenAI systems without appropriate authorization, a valid legal and ethical basis, and adequate data protection safeguards.

Additional precautions are required when community service activities involve children, vulnerable populations, or participants whose information requires enhanced protection.

The use of GenAI must comply with the journal's Privacy Statement, Publication Ethics, applicable institutional requirements, and relevant personal data protection legislation.

13. Screening and Evaluation of Suspected GenAI Misuse

RESONA may evaluate manuscripts for suspected inappropriate, misleading, or undisclosed use of Generative AI as part of its editorial and publication ethics procedures.

Automated AI-content detection tools may be used as supplementary screening instruments when appropriate. However, such tools may produce inaccurate classifications and must not constitute the sole basis for determining misconduct or rejecting a manuscript.

When concerns arise, the editorial team shall consider contextual evidence, the nature of the suspected issue, and the explanations provided by the authors.

Authors may be requested to provide relevant supporting materials, such as original activity records, data documentation, analytical procedures, manuscript drafts, or descriptions of GenAI use.

Any investigation shall be conducted fairly, objectively, and proportionately, with appropriate regard for confidentiality and the right of relevant parties to respond.

14. Violations and Editorial Actions

Inappropriate use of Generative AI may constitute publication misconduct when it involves fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, misleading documentation, unauthorized disclosure of confidential information, or other serious violations of scholarly integrity.

Depending on the nature and severity of the concern, RESONA may take the following editorial actions:

1. Requesting clarification or revision of the Declaration of Generative AI Use.
2. Requesting additional evidence, documentation, or manuscript corrections.
3. Returning a manuscript for revision when GenAI-assisted content requires further verification.
4. Rejecting a manuscript when serious scholarly integrity violations have been established.
5. Initiating an editorial investigation concerning potential misconduct in a published article.
6. Publishing a correction or an Expression of Concern when appropriate.
7. Retracting a published article when sufficient evidence establishes that its reliability or ethical integrity has been seriously compromised.

The journal shall consider the seriousness of the violation, the available evidence, and the authors' explanations before reaching an editorial determination.

All actions must be consistent with the journal's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Complaints and Appeals procedures, and Article Retraction Policy.

15. Policy Review, Implementation, and Commitment

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to promoting transparent, ethical, and accountable use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in scholarly publishing and community engagement.

The journal recognizes that GenAI technologies, their capabilities, and relevant scholarly publishing standards continue to evolve. This policy may therefore be reviewed and updated to reflect technological developments, ethical guidance, institutional requirements, and applicable legal obligations.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff are expected to familiarize themselves with this policy and comply with its requirements when participating in the journal's scholarly publication process.

The responsible use of Generative AI must support authentic scholarly contributions, reliable evidence, ethical community engagement, transparency, and human accountability.

Questions or concerns regarding the application of this policy may be submitted through the journal's official contact channels.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

Ethical Guidelines and References

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authorship and AI Tools. https://doi.org/10.24318/cCVRZBms
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Use of Artificial Intelligence in Publishing. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/artificial-intelligence/
4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. Updated January 2026. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/

AUTHORSHIP AND CONTRIBUTORSHIP CRITERIA

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Principles

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to promoting fairness, transparency, accountability, and integrity in the recognition of authorship and contributorship in scholarly publications.

This policy establishes the criteria for determining authorship, recognizing individual contributions, acknowledging non-author contributors, and resolving authorship-related concerns in manuscripts submitted to the journal.

RESONA follows the authorship principles recommended by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), adapted to the characteristics of community service, community engagement, technology transfer, and community empowerment activities.

Authorship must accurately reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the scholarly work. Individuals who meet the authorship criteria must receive appropriate recognition, while contributors who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged according to their roles.

2. Authorship Criteria

To qualify as an author of a manuscript submitted to RESONA, an individual must fulfill all four of the following criteria:

1. Substantial Intellectual Contribution: Making a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the community service activity, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data and evidence related to the work.
2. Manuscript Drafting or Critical Revision: Participating in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
3. Final Approval: Reviewing and approving the final version of the manuscript to be published.
4. Accountability: Agreeing to be accountable for all aspects of the work and ensuring that questions concerning the accuracy or integrity of any part of the manuscript are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All four criteria must be satisfied. Individuals who meet only one or some of these requirements do not automatically qualify for authorship.

Individuals who make substantial contributions to the work should be given an appropriate opportunity to participate in manuscript drafting, critical revision, and final approval.

3. Authorship in Community Service Publications

As a journal specializing in community service, RESONA recognizes that qualifying intellectual contributions may arise during the planning, implementation, evaluation, and scholarly reporting of community-based activities.

Relevant contributions may include:

1. Developing the conceptual framework, objectives, or design of a community service program.
2. Designing community empowerment interventions, educational programs, or technology transfer activities.
3. Developing innovative methods, appropriate technologies, or evaluation instruments.
4. Making substantial contributions to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of community service data.
5. Evaluating program outcomes, community participation, and the effectiveness of interventions.
6. Interpreting findings and their implications for community development.
7. Making substantial intellectual contributions to manuscript preparation, revision, and scholarly conclusions.

Participation in field activities, workshops, training sessions, administrative coordination, or community assistance alone does not automatically establish authorship eligibility.

Every listed author must also meet the requirements concerning manuscript drafting or critical revision, final approval, and accountability.

The journal encourages fair recognition of lecturers, researchers, students, community partners, and other collaborators who genuinely fulfill the authorship criteria.

4. Contributorship Criteria and Recognition

Contributorship refers to the identification and recognition of the specific roles performed by individuals in the development, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of scholarly work.

RESONA encourages transparent reporting of individual contributions to improve accountability and ensure that scholarly credit is appropriately assigned.

Contributions may include conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data collection, formal analysis, project administration, supervision, writing of the original draft, and critical review and editing.

The Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) may be used to describe individual contributions in a standardized manner.

However, the assignment of a contributorship role does not independently establish authorship eligibility. Individuals listed as authors must fulfill all four authorship criteria described in this policy.

5. Author Contributions Statement

Authors are required to provide an accurate Author Contributions Statement identifying the specific contributions of each listed author.

The statement should reflect actual intellectual and practical contributions to the manuscript and the underlying community service activities.

Example:

Author Contributions: Author A contributed to conceptualization, methodology, and original manuscript drafting. Author B contributed to community engagement, investigation, data collection, and formal analysis. Author C contributed to interpretation of findings, critical review, editing, and supervision. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to be accountable for the integrity and accuracy of the work.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the contribution statement has been reviewed and approved by all co-authors.

The editorial team may request clarification or supporting information concerning individual author contributions when necessary.

6. Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author serves as the primary contact between the author group and the editorial office throughout manuscript submission, peer review, publication, and post-publication communication.

The corresponding author is responsible for:

1. Ensuring that all listed authors meet the journal's authorship criteria.
2. Confirming that all authors have approved the manuscript and agreed to its submission.
3. Providing accurate names, affiliations, and contact information for all authors.
4. Ensuring agreement among authors concerning the order of authorship.
5. Communicating editorial decisions, reviewer comments, and revision requirements to co-authors.
6. Ensuring that author contributions, funding statements, conflicts of interest, and relevant ethical declarations are accurately reported.
7. Coordinating responses to editorial inquiries and post-publication concerns.

The designation of a corresponding author does not reduce the individual responsibility of other authors for the scholarly integrity of the publication.

7. Authorship Order and Institutional Affiliations

The order of authors must be determined through mutual agreement among the individuals who qualify for authorship.

RESONA does not determine authorship order on behalf of contributors.

All authors must agree on the authorship arrangement before manuscript submission.

Author names, institutional affiliations, and relevant contact information must be accurate and appropriately reflect the authors' institutional relationships.

Academic rank, administrative position, seniority, funding authority, or institutional leadership does not automatically confer authorship rights.

8. Non-Author Contributors and Acknowledgments

Individuals who have contributed to a community service activity or manuscript but do not meet all four authorship criteria should be recognized in the Acknowledgments section when appropriate.

Contributions that do not independently qualify an individual for authorship include:

1. Providing financial support or research funding without qualifying intellectual contributions.
2. Offering general supervision or administrative leadership.
3. Providing access to community locations, facilities, equipment, or institutional resources.
4. Assisting with event preparation, logistical arrangements, registration, or routine documentation.
5. Providing technical assistance, proofreading, or language editing without qualifying intellectual involvement.
6. Participating as a community service beneficiary without meeting the authorship requirements.

Community partners, local facilitators, institutional representatives, supporting organizations, and other contributors may be acknowledged according to their actual roles.

Authors should obtain permission from individuals who are specifically named in the Acknowledgments section.

Acknowledgments must respect participants' privacy, confidentiality, informed consent, and applicable ethical requirements.

9. Prohibited Authorship Practices

RESONA prohibits inappropriate authorship practices that misrepresent individual contributions or compromise publication integrity.

Prohibited practices include:

1. Gift Authorship: Including an individual as an author as a personal favor despite insufficient qualifying contributions.
2. Guest Authorship: Including a prominent researcher, institutional leader, or other individual primarily to enhance the perceived credibility of the manuscript.
3. Ghost Authorship: Failing to appropriately identify or acknowledge an individual who has made substantial contributions to the scholarly work.
4. Coercive Authorship: Pressuring contributors to include individuals who do not meet the journal's authorship criteria.
5. Misrepresentation of Contributions: Providing inaccurate or misleading statements concerning individual involvement in community service activities or manuscript preparation.

Authorship must reflect genuine scholarly contributions rather than institutional hierarchy, personal relationships, administrative authority, or financial arrangements.

10. Changes in Authorship

Authors are expected to finalize the author list and authorship order before submitting their manuscript to RESONA.

Any request to add, remove, or rearrange authors after manuscript submission must be communicated to the editorial team with an appropriate explanation.

Such requests must include written agreement from all listed authors and any individuals proposed for addition or removal.

The Editor-in-Chief may request additional information concerning the contributions and consent of the individuals involved.

Changes after manuscript acceptance require additional editorial consideration and must be supported by a legitimate justification.

Authorship corrections involving published articles will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and correction procedures.

11. Authorship Disputes and Resolution

Authorship disagreements should initially be resolved through transparent and constructive communication among the contributors.

When a dispute cannot be resolved by the contributors, the matter may be referred to the relevant institutions for investigation or mediation.

The editorial team may request supporting documentation, author contribution statements, or institutional clarification when necessary.

RESONA does not independently adjudicate complex disputes concerning intellectual ownership or individual contributions.

Where an unresolved dispute may affect publication integrity, editorial consideration may be suspended until the matter has been appropriately addressed.

All disputes will be handled fairly and confidentially in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and applicable editorial procedures.

12. Generative AI and Authorship

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) systems, including large language models and AI-assisted writing platforms, cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to RESONA.

Authorship requires human intellectual contribution, approval, responsibility, and accountability, which GenAI systems cannot independently fulfill.

Authors must disclose substantive use of GenAI technologies in accordance with the journal's Generative AI Policy.

The use of GenAI does not reduce the responsibility of human authors to verify the accuracy, originality, validity, and ethical compliance of submitted manuscripts.

13. Authorship Verification and Editorial Responsibilities

RESONA may request author contribution statements, authorship confirmation, or supporting documentation during manuscript submission and editorial evaluation.

The editorial team may seek clarification when author lists, contribution statements, or requested authorship changes raise reasonable concerns regarding publication ethics.

Authors are required to cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification and provide accurate information concerning their individual contributions.

Suspected authorship misconduct will be addressed in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics, correction procedures, and other applicable editorial policies.

14. Authorship and Contributorship Declaration

By submitting a manuscript to RESONA, authors confirm that:

1. All listed authors meet the four authorship criteria.
2. All eligible contributors have been appropriately recognized.
3. All authors have agreed on the author list and authorship order.
4. All authors have reviewed and approved the submitted manuscript.
5. Individual contributions have been accurately described.
6. The manuscript truthfully reports the relevant community service activities and outcomes.
7. All authors accept responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of the work.
8. Relevant conflicts of interest and substantive use of Generative AI have been disclosed.

Suggested Authorship and Contributorship Declaration:

The authors confirm that all individuals listed as authors meet the authorship criteria established by RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat. Each author has made qualifying intellectual contributions, participated in manuscript drafting or critical revision, approved the final manuscript, and agreed to be accountable for the integrity and accuracy of the work. Contributions have been accurately reported, and individuals who do not qualify for authorship have been appropriately acknowledged.

15. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to ensuring that scholarly recognition accurately reflects intellectual contributions and individual responsibilities.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Author Guidelines, Publication Ethics, Generative AI Policy, Copyright Notice, and other applicable editorial policies.

The journal may periodically review and update its authorship and contributorship requirements in accordance with developments in scholarly publishing standards and publication ethics.

Questions concerning authorship eligibility, contributor recognition, or authorship disputes may be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact channels.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

References and Ethical Guidelines

1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
3. Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT). Contributor Role Definitions. https://credit.niso.org/

MANUSCRIPT TYPES

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is a peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal dedicated to publishing original articles that report the implementation, evaluation, and outcomes of community service and community engagement activities.

The journal welcomes interdisciplinary contributions that demonstrate meaningful collaboration with communities, the application of knowledge and innovation, and measurable or adequately documented benefits for community partners.

All submitted manuscripts must be relevant to the journal's Focus and Scope and comply with its Author Guidelines, Publication Ethics, and other applicable editorial policies.

2. Community Service Articles

Community Service Articles constitute the primary manuscript type accepted by RESONA. These articles report completed community service activities supported by clear objectives, appropriate implementation methods, community participation, and credible evidence of results.

Eligible articles may report activities such as:

1. Community Empowerment: Programs designed to strengthen community knowledge, skills, independence, participation, and institutional capacity.
2. Training and Capacity Building: Educational activities, workshops, professional training, literacy programs, and other initiatives intended to improve the capabilities of community members or partner institutions.
3. Community Assistance and Mentoring: Structured mentoring, technical assistance, consultation, and participatory support provided to communities, schools, organizations, cooperatives, or micro, small, and medium enterprises.
4. Application of Appropriate Technology: Implementation and transfer of practical technologies, scientific innovations, digital solutions, or technical methods that address identifiable community needs.
5. Community-Based Innovation: Application of research findings, innovative approaches, or locally appropriate solutions through direct engagement with community partners.
6. Participatory Community Development: Collaborative initiatives involving community members in identifying problems, designing interventions, implementing activities, and evaluating results.
7. Community Well-being and Sustainability: Programs supporting education, environmental sustainability, economic development, social welfare, health promotion, sports, literacy, and other aspects of community development.

These examples represent forms of community service activities that may be reported within the Community Service Articles category. They do not constitute separate manuscript types.

3. Essential Requirements

To be considered for publication, a Community Service Article must demonstrate the following elements:

1. Community Needs: A clear identification of the problems, needs, or challenges experienced by the target community or partner institution.
2. Objectives: Specific objectives that respond to the identified community needs.
3. Community Engagement: An explanation of the role and participation of community members or partner institutions.
4. Implementation Methods: A transparent description of the approaches, procedures, activities, materials, and technologies used during implementation.
5. Results and Evaluation: Credible evidence of outputs, outcomes, community responses, or changes associated with the implemented activities.
6. Discussion and Contribution: An interpretation of the findings, their relevance to community needs, and their contribution to community development.
7. Sustainability: A discussion of practical benefits, limitations, and opportunities for maintaining or developing the program's outcomes.
8. Ethical Compliance: Appropriate attention to community permissions, informed consent, privacy, data protection, and other relevant ethical considerations.

Claims of program effectiveness or community impact must be supported by appropriate evidence rather than unsupported statements of success.

4. Recommended Manuscript Structure

Community Service Articles should follow the journal's official manuscript template and generally include:

1. Title: A clear and informative description of the community service activity.
2. Author Information: Author names, institutional affiliations, and corresponding author details.
3. Abstract: A concise summary of the community problem, objectives, methods, principal outcomes, and conclusions.
4. Keywords: Terms representing the main subjects of the article.
5. Introduction: Community context, identified problems, relevant literature, and objectives.
6. Methods: Community partners, location, implementation stages, approaches, and evaluation procedures.
7. Results and Discussion: Description and analysis of implemented activities, outputs, outcomes, and their implications.
8. Conclusion: Principal results, practical contributions, limitations, and relevant recommendations.
9. Acknowledgments and Required Declarations: Recognition of relevant contributors and applicable ethical or disclosure statements.
10. References: Scholarly sources supporting the manuscript.

The final arrangement and formatting of all sections must comply with the latest official RESONA manuscript template and Author Guidelines.

5. Manuscript Types Not Considered

To maintain the journal's focus on authentic community service activities, RESONA generally does not consider the following submissions:

1. Conventional research articles without a clearly identifiable community service or community engagement component.
2. Stand-alone literature reviews, systematic literature reviews, or bibliometric studies without substantive implementation and evaluation of community service activities.
3. Purely theoretical, conceptual, or opinion-based manuscripts that do not report actual community service implementation.
4. Community service proposals or descriptions of planned activities without implementation results.
5. Activity reports that merely describe events, schedules, attendance, or ceremonial activities without sufficient scholarly analysis and evaluation.
6. Manuscripts containing fabricated activities, misleading documentation, unsupported outcome claims, or other violations of publication ethics.
7. Manuscripts that do not demonstrate relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.

Research-based knowledge, literature analysis, and conceptual frameworks may be included in a Community Service Article when they support the design, implementation, interpretation, or evaluation of genuine community service activities.

6. Editorial Assessment and Peer Review

All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial editorial screening to assess their relevance, completeness, originality, ethical compliance, and conformity with the journal's manuscript requirements.

Manuscripts considered suitable for further evaluation will undergo peer review in accordance with RESONA's Peer Review Process.

Editorial decisions are based on the quality of the manuscript, appropriateness of the implementation methods, reliability of the reported evidence, relevance to community needs, and potential contribution to community development.

Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee acceptance or publication.

7. Submission Information

Authors must prepare their manuscripts using the official RESONA article template and submit them through the journal's online submission system.

During submission, authors should select the Articles section, corresponding to the journal's Community Service Articles manuscript type.

Online Submission:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/submissions

Editorial Inquiries:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

ARCHIVING

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. Digital Archiving and Preservation Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to supporting the long-term preservation, integrity, accessibility, and availability of its published scholarly content.

The journal recognizes digital preservation as an essential part of responsible scholarly publishing. This policy establishes the journal's approach to maintaining its publication records and supporting continued access to published articles, including in the event of technical disruption, website migration, or changes in publishing infrastructure.

2. Journal Archives

RESONA maintains an online archive of its published issues and articles through its official Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

The archive provides access to previously published issues, article information, abstracts, and available full-text files.

The journal's publication archive includes issues published since 2017 and is accessible through the following link:

Official Journal Archives:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/issue/archive

Published articles remain part of the journal's scholarly record and should continue to be accessible through the official archive.

3. Digital Preservation and Data Protection

The publisher is committed to supporting appropriate technical and administrative measures to preserve journal content, article files, publication metadata, and essential publishing records.

Digital preservation activities should include, where technically available and implemented:

1. Maintaining secure copies of published article files and relevant journal metadata.
2. Performing periodic backups of the journal database and publication files.
3. Protecting journal records against accidental deletion, unauthorized modification, data corruption, and system failure.
4. Maintaining appropriate procedures for restoring journal content following technical disruptions.
5. Preserving article bibliographic information, publication dates, issue details, and associated identifiers.
6. Supporting the continuity of access when journal hosting arrangements or publishing platforms change.

The technical arrangements, backup frequency, storage locations, and restoration procedures are subject to the publisher's documented information technology and journal management practices.

4. Persistent Identifiers and Metadata Preservation

RESONA uses Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) to support persistent identification, citation, and discovery of its scholarly publications.

The journal is committed to maintaining accurate article metadata, including titles, author information, abstracts, keywords, publication details, and DOI information.

Maintaining accurate DOI records and article metadata supports continued identification of published works when website addresses or publishing infrastructure change.

DOI registration and metadata management complement, but do not replace, the preservation of full-text article files.

5. Distributed Digital Preservation

RESONA recognizes the importance of distributed digital preservation systems, including LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe), CLOCKSS (Controlled Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe), and the PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN), in supporting the long-term preservation of scholarly publications.

The journal may consider participation in appropriate external preservation services, subject to technical compatibility, eligibility requirements, institutional arrangements, and confirmation of successful preservation activities.

Participation in an external digital preservation service shall be publicly declared only after its activation, applicable agreements, and preservation status have been verified.

The availability of preservation features within the OJS platform does not, by itself, establish active participation in a distributed preservation network.

6. Author Self-Archiving

RESONA supports the dissemination and preservation of scholarly knowledge through appropriate author self-archiving practices.

Authors may deposit the published version of their articles in institutional repositories, subject repositories, personal academic websites, or other lawful scholarly platforms, in accordance with the journal's Copyright Notice and the applicable Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License.

Authors are encouraged to provide complete bibliographic information and acknowledge the original publication in RESONA, including the article's DOI where available.

Deposited copies should preserve the integrity of the published scholarly record and clearly identify any subsequent corrections or retractions.

7. Preservation of the Scholarly Record

RESONA is committed to maintaining the integrity and traceability of its published scholarly record.

Published articles, corrections, expressions of concern, and retraction notices should be retained and made accessible in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Article Retraction Policy.

When a published article requires correction or retraction, the journal will seek to maintain a transparent record of the editorial action without unnecessarily removing the original publication from the scholarly archive.

Any restrictions on access to published materials will be considered in accordance with applicable legal obligations, privacy requirements, and publication ethics principles.

8. Continuity of Access

In the event of website maintenance, hosting changes, technical failure, or migration to another publishing platform, RESONA will seek to maintain the integrity and continuity of its published scholarly content.

The publisher will endeavor to preserve publication files, issue information, and article metadata during changes to the journal's digital infrastructure.

Should the journal discontinue publication, the publisher will seek to maintain access to its existing archive or arrange an appropriate preservation and access solution, subject to available institutional and technical resources.

9. Policy Responsibility and Review

The editorial team and the publisher share responsibility for supporting the implementation and periodic evaluation of this Archiving Policy.

The policy may be reviewed and updated to reflect developments in digital preservation standards, publishing technologies, institutional requirements, and applicable scholarly publishing guidelines.

Questions concerning journal archives, accessibility of published articles, or digital preservation may be addressed to the RESONA Editorial Office.

RESONA Editorial Office:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

PLAGIARISM POLICY

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining academic integrity, originality, transparency, and ethical standards in scholarly publishing. The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, duplicate publication, or other practices that misrepresent the originality and integrity of submitted manuscripts.

All manuscripts submitted to RESONA must represent original scholarly contributions and must appropriately acknowledge previously published works, ideas, data, images, and other intellectual materials.

This policy applies to all authors and manuscripts submitted to the journal and is implemented in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics, Author Guidelines, and relevant recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Definition and Forms of Plagiarism

Plagiarism occurs when an individual uses another person's words, ideas, data, research findings, images, or other intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or presents such materials as original work.

Forms of plagiarism and related unethical publication practices include:

1. Direct Plagiarism: Reproducing text from another source without appropriate quotation or acknowledgment.
2. Paraphrasing Plagiarism: Rewriting another person's ideas or statements without proper attribution.
3. Mosaic Plagiarism: Combining or modifying phrases from existing sources while retaining substantial similarities without adequate acknowledgment.
4. Data and Idea Plagiarism: Using another individual's original data, findings, methods, interpretations, or intellectual contributions without appropriate recognition.
5. Image and Figure Plagiarism: Reusing photographs, diagrams, tables, illustrations, or other visual materials without appropriate acknowledgment or required permission.
6. Inappropriate Text Recycling: Reusing substantial portions of one's own previously published writing without adequate disclosure or acknowledgment.
7. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Submitting or publishing substantially overlapping scholarly work without transparent disclosure of the relationship with previous publications.
8. Translation Plagiarism: Translating previously published materials into another language and presenting them as original work without proper attribution.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all borrowed or previously published materials are appropriately cited and used in accordance with applicable copyright and publication ethics requirements.

3. Similarity Screening

RESONA applies originality and similarity screening as part of its initial editorial evaluation of submitted manuscripts.

The editorial team may use recognized similarity detection tools, such as Turnitin or other appropriate software, to identify potentially overlapping text and sources.

Similarity screening should be conducted before a manuscript proceeds to peer review. Additional screening may be performed after substantial revisions or whenever concerns regarding originality arise.

Similarity reports are used as supporting evidence to assist editorial assessment. A similarity percentage alone does not establish whether plagiarism has occurred.

Editors must examine the nature, source, location, attribution, and extent of textual overlap before determining whether the manuscript meets the journal's originality requirements.

4. Similarity Assessment and Editorial Judgment

RESONA evaluates textual similarity through a contextual and evidence-based editorial assessment rather than relying exclusively on a numerical similarity score.

In evaluating a similarity report, the editorial team may consider:

1. The overall similarity percentage and the extent of overlap with individual sources.
2. Whether the overlapping material has been properly cited or acknowledged.
3. Whether the similarity occurs in commonly used terminology, methodological descriptions, or other standard expressions.
4. Whether substantial overlap occurs in the Introduction, Results and Discussion, or Conclusion sections.
5. Whether previously published text, data, tables, or figures have been reused without appropriate disclosure.
6. Whether the overlap misrepresents the originality, scholarly contribution, or findings of the manuscript.
7. Whether copyright permissions or other relevant legal requirements have been satisfied.

Bibliographic references, properly acknowledged quotations, common technical expressions, and standard methodological terminology may require different treatment from unattributed copying of substantive scholarly content.

A low similarity score does not automatically indicate that a manuscript is free from plagiarism. Conversely, a higher similarity score does not automatically establish misconduct.

The final assessment of originality remains the responsibility of the editorial team.

5. Originality of Community Service Activities

As a journal specializing in community service, RESONA places particular emphasis on the authenticity of community engagement activities and the originality of their scholarly reporting.

Authors must accurately report the implementation, methods, community partners, results, and outcomes of the activities described in their manuscripts.

The following practices are prohibited:

1. Copying descriptions of community service activities from previously published articles and presenting them as newly implemented programs.
2. Reusing another author's community service evaluation data, participant responses, or findings without appropriate authorization and attribution.
3. Presenting photographs or documentation from unrelated community service activities as evidence of the reported program.
4. Submitting substantially identical accounts of the same community service program to multiple journals without disclosure.
5. Misrepresenting previously published community service outcomes as new and independent results.

Where a manuscript reports the continuation, replication, or development of a previously published community service activity, authors must clearly identify the earlier work and explain the new contribution, implementation context, findings, or outcomes.

6. Self-Plagiarism, Text Recycling, and Duplicate Publication

Authors must transparently acknowledge relevant materials that have appeared in their previous publications.

Limited reuse of standard methodological descriptions may be acceptable when appropriately disclosed, cited where necessary, and consistent with applicable copyright requirements.

However, substantial reuse of previously published text, data, figures, or findings without appropriate disclosure may constitute inappropriate text recycling or redundant publication.

Authors must inform the editorial team when a submitted manuscript is related to another publication, conference proceeding, institutional report, repository deposit, or previously disseminated version of the same work.

Such disclosure does not automatically result in rejection. The editorial team will evaluate the extent of overlap, the nature of the earlier dissemination, applicable rights, and the originality of the new contribution.

Manuscripts that substantially duplicate previously published scholarly work without a legitimate and clearly disclosed contribution may be rejected.

7. Responsibilities of Authors

All authors are responsible for ensuring the originality, accuracy, and ethical integrity of their manuscripts.

Authors must:

1. Submit original manuscripts that have not been published or submitted simultaneously to another journal, except where a permissible prior version has been transparently disclosed.
2. Provide accurate citations and references for all relevant sources.
3. Use quotations, paraphrases, data, tables, and figures in accordance with scholarly attribution and copyright requirements.
4. Disclose relevant previous publications and potential overlaps with the submitted manuscript.
5. Ensure that community service activities, evaluation results, and supporting documentation are authentic.
6. Independently verify all citations, references, and substantive content produced with Generative Artificial Intelligence tools.
7. Cooperate with requests for clarification, revision, or supporting evidence when originality concerns arise.

The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors are informed of and agree to comply with this policy.

8. Plagiarism Screening and Editorial Actions

When potential plagiarism or inappropriate textual overlap is identified, RESONA may take actions proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern.

Possible editorial actions include:

1. Request for Clarification: Authors may be asked to explain the source or circumstances of the identified similarity.
2. Manuscript Revision: Authors may be required to correct attribution, revise overlapping passages, or clarify relationships with earlier publications.
3. Additional Screening: A revised manuscript may undergo further similarity assessment.
4. Manuscript Rejection: Manuscripts containing serious or unresolved plagiarism may be rejected.
5. Further Investigation: Suspected serious misconduct may be referred for additional editorial or institutional investigation when appropriate.

Authors should be given an appropriate opportunity to respond to allegations before a final determination of misconduct is made.

Editorial decisions will be based on the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and relevant publication ethics guidance.

9. Plagiarism in Published Articles

Concerns about plagiarism or redundant publication may also be reported after an article has been published.

When credible allegations arise, the editorial team will review the evidence and may request clarification from the authors or relevant institutions.

Depending on the findings and severity of the issue, appropriate actions may include publication of a correction, an Expression of Concern, or a retraction.

Retraction decisions will be considered in accordance with the journal's Article Retraction Policy and relevant COPE guidance.

The journal seeks to preserve the transparency and integrity of the scholarly record while ensuring fair and evidence-based handling of publication ethics concerns.

10. Generative AI and Plagiarism Prevention

The use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) does not exempt authors from their responsibility to produce original and properly attributed scholarly work.

Authors must verify GenAI-assisted text, citations, references, interpretations, and visual materials to ensure that they do not contain plagiarism, fabricated sources, or misleading information.

The use of GenAI to disguise copied material, fabricate references, or present another individual's intellectual contributions as original work is prohibited.

Substantive use of GenAI must be disclosed in accordance with RESONA's Generative AI Policy.

11. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to implementing plagiarism prevention through author education, editorial screening, responsible peer review, and appropriate handling of research integrity concerns.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Publication Ethics, Author Guidelines, Generative AI Policy, Authorship and Contributorship Criteria, and Article Retraction Policy.

The journal may periodically review and update its plagiarism screening procedures to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards, detection technologies, and ethical guidelines.

Questions or concerns regarding plagiarism and publication originality may be addressed to the journal through its official contact page.

RESONA Editorial Office:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, accountability, and ethical conduct in scholarly publishing and community service activities.

The journal takes all credible allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously, whether they arise before manuscript publication, during editorial evaluation and peer review, or after an article has been published.

This policy provides procedures for receiving, assessing, investigating, and resolving allegations of misconduct involving authors, reviewers, editors, or other individuals associated with the journal's publication process.

RESONA follows the principles outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and relevant guidance concerning research integrity and publication misconduct.

An allegation does not automatically establish misconduct. All concerns must be evaluated fairly, objectively, confidentially, and on the basis of available evidence.

2. Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, the following practices:

1. Fabrication: Inventing data, participants, observations, results, community service activities, or other information and presenting them as genuine.
2. Falsification: Manipulating data, documents, procedures, images, or evaluation results in a manner that misrepresents the actual implementation or outcomes of an activity.
3. Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, data, images, or intellectual contributions without appropriate attribution.
4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping work without proper disclosure or presenting previously published findings as new scholarly contributions.
5. Authorship Misconduct: Engaging in gift authorship, guest authorship, ghost authorship, coercive authorship, or other misrepresentations of scholarly contributions.
6. Peer Review Manipulation: Using false reviewer identities, fraudulent review reports, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or inappropriate influence to manipulate editorial decisions.
7. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose relevant financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that may affect the integrity of scholarly evaluation.
8. Ethical Violations: Conducting or reporting activities in ways that violate applicable requirements concerning informed consent, participant privacy, confidentiality, community permissions, or institutional ethics.
9. Misuse of Generative Artificial Intelligence: Using Generative AI to fabricate data, references, images, community service documentation, or misleading scholarly content.
10. Misrepresentation of Funding or Institutional Support: Providing false or misleading information concerning funding sources, institutional approval, community partnerships, or project authorization.

The editorial team may also investigate other conduct that raises substantial concerns regarding the reliability, originality, ethical integrity, or transparency of a manuscript or published article.

3. Misconduct in Community Service Activities

As a scholarly journal specializing in community service and community empowerment, RESONA places particular emphasis on the authenticity, ethical implementation, and accurate reporting of community-based activities.

Examples of misconduct specific to community service publications include:

1. Reporting community service activities that were never implemented.
2. Inventing community partners, beneficiaries, institutions, participants, or activity locations.
3. Fabricating attendance records, training results, questionnaires, interviews, observations, or program evaluations.
4. Manipulating photographs or using documentation from unrelated activities to misrepresent program implementation.
5. Exaggerating outcomes, effectiveness, or community impact without appropriate supporting evidence.
6. Presenting previously completed activities as newly implemented programs without appropriate disclosure.
7. Using community members' personal information or images without appropriate authorization or consent.
8. Misrepresenting the participation, approval, or contribution of community partners and collaborating institutions.

Authors must maintain appropriate documentation of community service implementation and ensure that all reported findings, outcomes, and supporting evidence accurately reflect the activities conducted.

The journal may request relevant documentation when credible concerns regarding the authenticity or reliability of reported activities arise.

4. Reporting Allegations of Misconduct

Concerns regarding suspected research or publication misconduct may be submitted by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, community partners, institutions, or other individuals with relevant information.

Reports should be submitted to the RESONA Editorial Office through the journal's official contact channels.

Where possible, a report should include:

1. The title, DOI, or other identifying information of the manuscript or published article concerned.
2. A clear description of the alleged misconduct.
3. Relevant supporting evidence, documentation, or references.
4. The specific sections, data, figures, or publication practices that raise concern.
5. Contact information for follow-up communication, where the reporting individual is willing to provide it.

Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain specific, credible, and verifiable information.

The journal will not dismiss a credible allegation solely because the reporting individual requests confidentiality or does not disclose their identity.

Official Editorial Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

5. Initial Assessment of Allegations

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the concern falls within the journal's responsibilities and whether sufficient information is available for further consideration.

The initial assessment may involve:

1. Reviewing the allegation and any supporting evidence.
2. Identifying the manuscript, article, or publication process involved.
3. Assessing the seriousness, credibility, and potential implications of the concern.
4. Reviewing relevant journal policies and publication records.
5. Determining whether further clarification, documentation, or investigation is necessary.

If a concern is clearly unsupported, outside the journal's responsibilities, or based on a misunderstanding that can be resolved through clarification, the editorial team may close the matter with an appropriate explanation.

Credible allegations requiring further examination will proceed to an appropriate editorial investigation.

6. Investigation Procedures

When an allegation warrants further investigation, RESONA will examine the concern using procedures proportionate to its seriousness and complexity.

The investigation may include:

1. Examining the submitted manuscript or published article and relevant supporting materials.
2. Reviewing similarity reports, original documents, data records, or image files.
3. Requesting original evidence concerning community service activities, evaluation procedures, or reported outcomes.
4. Seeking written explanations from the authors or other individuals concerned.
5. Consulting independent experts or relevant editorial members when necessary.
6. Reviewing submission histories, peer review records, and editorial communications where relevant.
7. Referring matters to appropriate institutions when formal investigation exceeds the journal's authority.

Individuals whose conduct is questioned will ordinarily be informed of the specific concerns and given a reasonable opportunity to provide an explanation or supporting evidence.

The editorial team will assess the available evidence and responses before reaching a conclusion.

The investigation shall not rely solely on an allegation, an automated similarity report, or an unsupported assumption of misconduct.

7. Responsibilities of Authors and Other Parties

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, and ethical integrity of their manuscripts and must cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries concerning potential misconduct.

When requested, authors may be required to provide relevant evidence such as original data, evaluation instruments, implementation records, activity documentation, ethical permissions, or other materials necessary to assess the reported work.

Reviewers and editors must report credible integrity concerns identified during the evaluation process and must not misuse confidential manuscript information.

Individuals involved in an allegation are expected to provide accurate information, preserve relevant documentation, and refrain from interfering with the assessment process.

8. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Protection of Reporting Parties

RESONA is committed to handling allegations of misconduct confidentially and impartially, consistent with applicable laws, institutional obligations, and publication ethics requirements.

Information relating to an allegation will be shared only with individuals who have a legitimate role in evaluating or resolving the concern.

The journal will seek to protect individuals who report concerns in good faith from inappropriate retaliation within the journal's editorial processes.

Individuals accused of misconduct will be treated fairly and given an appropriate opportunity to respond.

Where a complaint involves an editor, reviewer, or other individual with a relevant conflict of interest, the matter should be assigned to an appropriate independent editor or representative of the publisher.

Confidentiality does not prevent the journal from communicating with relevant institutions or authorized parties when such communication is necessary to evaluate a serious concern.

9. Cooperation with Institutions and Relevant Authorities

RESONA recognizes that certain allegations require formal investigation by the institutions responsible for the individuals or activities concerned.

The journal may contact the relevant university, research institution, ethics committee, funding organization, or other appropriate authority when the matter cannot be adequately investigated through editorial procedures alone.

Relevant supporting evidence may be shared with authorized institutional representatives, subject to applicable confidentiality and data protection requirements.

The journal may cooperate with institutional investigations and consider their findings when determining whether editorial action is required.

Institutional disciplinary decisions remain the responsibility of the relevant institutions, while decisions concerning manuscript acceptance, correction, retraction, or publication records remain within the journal's editorial responsibilities.

10. Editorial Actions Before Publication

When allegations arise during manuscript submission, editorial screening, or peer review, RESONA may take actions appropriate to the nature and seriousness of the concern.

Possible actions include:

1. Requesting clarification or additional documentation.
2. Requesting corrections or revisions when the issue can be appropriately resolved.
3. Suspending editorial evaluation while a serious concern is examined.
4. Seeking independent expert assessment or institutional clarification.
5. Rejecting the manuscript when serious misconduct or unresolved integrity concerns justify rejection.
6. Referring credible allegations to relevant institutional authorities where appropriate.

Editorial actions must be based on the available evidence and must respect the principles of fairness, proportionality, and scholarly independence.

11. Editorial Actions After Publication

RESONA takes allegations concerning published articles seriously and will assess whether identified problems affect the accuracy, reliability, ethical integrity, or transparency of the scholarly record.

Depending on the findings, possible editorial actions include:

1. Correction: Publishing a correction when an identifiable error requires amendment but does not invalidate the principal findings or conclusions.
2. Expression of Concern: Informing readers about serious unresolved concerns when the available evidence or ongoing investigation warrants such notice.
3. Retraction: Retracting an article when its findings or integrity are seriously compromised and retraction is justified under the journal's Article Retraction Policy.
4. No Further Action: Closing the case when the allegation is not substantiated or does not justify a formal editorial correction.

Any formal post-publication notice should be clearly identified, appropriately linked to the affected article, and presented in a transparent manner.

The journal seeks to preserve the scholarly record and will not routinely delete published articles solely because misconduct is suspected.

12. Appeals and Reconsideration

Individuals directly affected by an editorial decision concerning alleged misconduct may submit a written request for reconsideration through the journal's official contact channels.

An appeal should explain the grounds for reconsideration and provide any relevant additional evidence.

Where practicable, appeals will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or another authorized editor who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision.

When the Editor-in-Chief has a relevant conflict of interest, the matter may be referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher.

Appeals will be considered fairly and objectively. However, an appeal does not automatically reverse an editorial decision or prevent necessary measures to protect the scholarly record.

13. Record Keeping and Continuous Improvement

RESONA will seek to maintain appropriate confidential records of misconduct allegations, supporting evidence, relevant correspondence, editorial assessments, and final decisions.

Such records should be managed in accordance with applicable institutional requirements, confidentiality obligations, and the journal's Privacy Statement.

The editorial team may use lessons from resolved cases to improve author guidance, manuscript screening, peer review procedures, and publication ethics practices.

14. Relationship with Other Editorial Policies

This policy should be read together with RESONA's Publication Ethics, Plagiarism Policy, Authorship and Contributorship Criteria, Generative AI Policy, Peer Review Process, Privacy Statement, and Article Retraction Policy.

Where an allegation concerns a specific form of publication misconduct, the editorial team may apply the more detailed procedures established in the relevant policy.

The journal may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards, relevant COPE guidance, and applicable institutional or legal requirements.

References and Ethical Guidelines

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Cooperation Between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity and Publication Misconduct Cases. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2018.1.3
3. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Flowcharts and Infographics. https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts

CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining transparency, objectivity, accountability, and integrity throughout the scholarly publication process.

The journal recognizes that conflicts of interest, also known as competing interests, may arise when financial, personal, professional, institutional, or other relationships could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, scholarly judgment, manuscript preparation, peer review, editorial decisions, or publication outcomes.

This policy establishes the responsibilities of authors, peer reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and the publisher in identifying, disclosing, evaluating, and managing potential conflicts of interest.

The policy is developed with reference to the ethical principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

The existence of a conflict of interest does not automatically indicate unethical conduct or make a manuscript unsuitable for publication. However, relevant interests must be disclosed and appropriately managed to protect the credibility of the scholarly record.

2. Definition and Types of Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when an individual's primary professional responsibilities may be influenced, or appear to be influenced, by secondary interests.

Potential conflicts of interest may include:

1. Financial Interests: Research or community service funding, consulting fees, honoraria, employment, paid advisory roles, financial investments, intellectual property rights, patents, or other financial benefits related to the reported work.
2. Personal Interests: Family relationships, close friendships, personal disputes, or other relationships that may affect objective scholarly judgment.
3. Professional Interests: Academic competition, recent research collaborations, supervisory relationships, employment connections, or professional partnerships that could influence manuscript evaluation.
4. Institutional Interests: Relationships involving universities, research institutions, community organizations, funding agencies, or other institutions with a direct interest in the reported activities or publication outcomes.
5. Intellectual Interests: Strongly held academic positions, competing scholarly claims, or other intellectual commitments that may affect impartial evaluation.
6. Other Relevant Interests: Any relationship, activity, commitment, or circumstance that could reasonably raise concerns regarding the independence, transparency, or credibility of the publication process.

Individuals involved in the publication process are expected to disclose relevant interests even when they believe those interests have not influenced their work or judgment.

3. Responsibilities of Authors

All authors submitting manuscripts to RESONA must disclose financial and non-financial relationships or activities that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the preparation, implementation, evaluation, interpretation, or reporting of their scholarly work.

Authors are responsible for:

1. Identifying and disclosing relevant financial and non-financial interests.
2. Providing accurate information concerning funding, sponsorship, institutional support, and other relationships related to the manuscript.
3. Disclosing any financial or professional involvement with organizations that may benefit from the findings or outcomes of the reported community service activities.
4. Ensuring that sponsors, funders, or community partners do not improperly influence the interpretation or reporting of results.
5. Updating their declarations when relevant circumstances change during manuscript evaluation or publication.
6. Cooperating with reasonable editorial requests for clarification concerning potential conflicts of interest.

All authors must review and approve the conflict of interest declaration before manuscript submission.

The corresponding author is responsible for coordinating the collection and submission of conflict of interest information from all co-authors.

4. Conflicts of Interest in Community Service Activities

Given the community service orientation of RESONA, particular attention must be given to relationships between authors, community partners, funding institutions, government agencies, private companies, and organizations involved in the reported activities.

Potential conflicts of interest may arise when:

1. Authors receive financial compensation from organizations benefiting from a community service program.
2. Authors have ownership interests in products, technologies, training services, or business models introduced during community service activities.
3. Community service outcomes are evaluated by individuals who have direct financial or institutional interests in demonstrating program success.
4. Authors are employed by, affiliated with, or hold leadership positions in organizations that benefit from the reported program.
5. Funding institutions or sponsors seek to influence the selection, analysis, interpretation, or publication of program outcomes.
6. Authors have personal or professional relationships with community partners that may affect the independent reporting of findings.

Such relationships must be disclosed when relevant, regardless of whether they have actually influenced the reported findings.

Authors must accurately report community service results, including limitations, implementation challenges, and findings that may not favor the interests of a sponsor or partner organization.

Community partnerships and institutional collaboration are not inherently conflicts of interest. Their relevance must be assessed according to the nature of the relationship and its potential influence on scholarly judgment.

5. Funding and Sponsorship Disclosure

Authors must disclose all relevant sources of financial support received for the community service activities and the preparation of the manuscript.

Funding information should identify the funding organization and, where applicable, relevant grant or project identification details.

Authors must explain the role of sponsors or funding organizations in the design, implementation, data collection, evaluation, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or decision to submit the work for publication.

When a sponsor or funding organization has no role in these activities, authors should state this clearly.

The disclosure of funding must be distinguished from the declaration of conflicts of interest. Financial support should be reported even when the authors do not consider it to constitute a conflict.

Example of Funding Disclosure:

Funding: This community service program was supported by [name of funding institution] under [grant or project number, if applicable]. The funding institution had no role in the evaluation of program outcomes, interpretation of findings, manuscript preparation, or decision to submit the article for publication.

6. Mandatory Conflict of Interest Declaration

All manuscripts submitted to RESONA must include a clear and accurate Conflict of Interest statement.

The declaration must be included in a separate section entitled Conflict of Interest before the References section, in accordance with the journal's manuscript template.

Authors must use one of the following statements, as appropriate:

A. When No Conflict of Interest Exists:

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no financial, personal, professional, or institutional conflicts of interest that could have influenced the work reported in this article.

B. When a Conflict of Interest Exists:

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare the following potential conflicts of interest: [describe the relevant financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships]. These interests have been disclosed to the editorial team. The authors remain responsible for the accuracy, objectivity, and integrity of the reported work.

Authors must ensure that the declaration accurately reflects their circumstances. The editorial team may request additional information when necessary.

7. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers are responsible for maintaining impartiality, confidentiality, independence, and objectivity when evaluating manuscripts submitted to RESONA.

Before accepting a review invitation, reviewers must disclose any relevant relationships or interests that could influence, or appear to influence, their evaluation.

Potential reviewer conflicts may include:

1. Current employment at the same institution as one or more manuscript authors.
2. Recent close research collaborations, joint publications, supervisory relationships, or shared grants with the authors.
3. Personal, family, or professional relationships that may compromise impartiality.
4. Direct financial or intellectual interests in the outcomes of the manuscript.
5. Strong academic competition or other circumstances that may prevent an independent evaluation.

Reviewers who identify a significant conflict of interest must notify the editorial team and decline or withdraw from the review assignment unless the editor has determined that the disclosed circumstance does not compromise independent evaluation.

Reviewers must not use unpublished manuscript information for personal, academic, professional, or financial advantage.

The journal may reassign a manuscript to another reviewer when a relevant conflict of interest is identified.

8. Responsibilities of Editors and Editorial Board Members

Editors and editorial board members must maintain independence and impartiality in manuscript assignment, reviewer selection, editorial evaluation, and publication decisions.

Editors must disclose relationships or interests that may compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their editorial judgment.

An editor with a relevant conflict of interest must withdraw from handling the manuscript and transfer editorial responsibility to another qualified editor without the identified conflict.

Examples of circumstances requiring particular attention include:

1. Manuscripts authored or co-authored by an editor.
2. Manuscripts submitted by close family members or personal associates of an editor.
3. Manuscripts involving recent close collaborators, supervisors, students, or individuals with whom an editor has significant professional relationships.
4. Manuscripts involving organizations in which an editor has a direct financial or professional interest.
5. Manuscripts concerning activities in which an editor has been substantially involved.

Editors must not use confidential manuscript information for personal advantage.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for ensuring that editorial conflicts are identified and managed appropriately.

When the Editor-in-Chief has a relevant conflict of interest, manuscript handling must be delegated to an appropriately qualified and independent editor or an authorized representative designated by the publisher.

9. Submissions from Editorial Board Members and Affiliated Institutions

RESONA recognizes that editors, editorial board members, and researchers affiliated with the publisher may submit scholarly manuscripts to the journal.

Such submissions are not automatically prohibited. However, additional safeguards must be applied to protect editorial independence and ensure fair treatment.

Manuscripts submitted by editors or editorial board members must be handled by an independent editor who has no relevant conflict of interest.

The submitting editor must not participate in reviewer selection, the peer review process, or editorial decisions concerning their own manuscript.

Manuscripts originating from Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo or other institutions affiliated with editorial members must undergo the same scholarly evaluation standards as manuscripts from external institutions.

Institutional affiliation alone does not automatically establish misconduct or disqualify a manuscript from publication. However, relevant relationships must be considered when assigning editors and reviewers.

10. Publisher Independence and Financial Considerations

RESONA is published by Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo.

The publisher supports the journal's scholarly activities while respecting the independence of editorial decisions.

Financial contributions, institutional relationships, sponsorships, or Article Processing Charges (APCs) must not influence manuscript acceptance, rejection, reviewer recommendations, or other scholarly editorial decisions.

Payment of publication fees does not guarantee publication.

The final determination of manuscript suitability remains the responsibility of the authorized editorial team and must be based on scholarly quality, originality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.

11. Disclosure and Management Procedures

Potential conflicts of interest should be identified and disclosed as early as possible in the manuscript submission and evaluation process.

RESONA may apply the following procedures:

1. Identification: Authors, reviewers, editors, and relevant editorial staff identify relationships or interests that may affect independent judgment.
2. Disclosure: Relevant interests are communicated to the editorial team through appropriate declarations or editorial correspondence.
3. Assessment: The editorial team evaluates the nature, relevance, and potential influence of the disclosed interests.
4. Management: Appropriate safeguards may include additional disclosure, independent evaluation, reassignment of editorial responsibility, reviewer replacement, or recusal from decision-making.
5. Documentation: Relevant disclosures and editorial actions are recorded in accordance with the journal's administrative and confidentiality procedures.
6. Publication: Author declarations and relevant funding disclosures are included in the published article when applicable.

The journal will consider the seriousness of the potential conflict and the effectiveness of available safeguards when determining the appropriate response.

12. Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest

Failure to disclose a relevant conflict of interest may raise concerns regarding the transparency and integrity of a submitted or published manuscript.

When an undisclosed conflict is identified, the editorial team may request clarification and supporting information from the individuals concerned.

Appropriate editorial actions may include:

1. Requesting a revised or additional conflict of interest declaration.
2. Reassigning editorial or peer review responsibilities.
3. Reassessing editorial decisions affected by a significant undisclosed conflict.
4. Publishing a correction when a relevant conflict was omitted from a published article.
5. Investigating potential publication misconduct when intentional concealment or improper influence is suspected.
6. Taking further post-publication action when the integrity or reliability of the article has been seriously compromised.

A previously undisclosed relationship does not automatically justify manuscript rejection or article retraction. Editorial action must be based on the significance of the interest, available evidence, and its potential effect on the scholarly record.

Any investigation will follow the journal's Allegations of Research Misconduct and Article Retraction policies, where applicable.

13. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Accountability

Conflict of interest disclosures will be handled fairly, objectively, and with appropriate confidentiality during editorial assessment.

Information obtained through the disclosure process will be used for legitimate editorial and publication ethics purposes.

The editorial team must avoid discriminatory treatment and ensure that disclosed interests are assessed according to their relevance and potential influence on scholarly judgment.

Individuals concerned should have a reasonable opportunity to clarify relevant circumstances before significant adverse editorial actions are taken.

The journal may consult appropriate independent experts or institutional representatives when complex conflicts require additional evaluation.

14. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to promoting transparent disclosure and responsible management of conflicts of interest in scholarly publishing.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Author Guidelines, Authorship and Contributorship Criteria, Allegations of Research Misconduct, Generative AI Policy, and Article Retraction Policy.

The journal may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards, publication ethics guidance, and applicable institutional requirements.

Questions concerning conflict of interest disclosures or related editorial procedures may be directed to the RESONA Editorial Office.

RESONA Editorial Office:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

References and Ethical Guidelines

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
2. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Disclosure of Financial and Non-Financial Relationships and Activities, and Conflicts of Interest. ICMJE Conflicts of Interest Recommendations
3. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. https://doi.org/10.24318/2019.1.4

POST-PUBLICATION DISCUSSION

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to promoting constructive scholarly dialogue, transparency, accountability, and continuous evaluation of published scientific work.

The journal recognizes that scholarly discussion does not end with the publication of an article. Readers, researchers, authors, practitioners, community partners, and other interested parties may provide evidence-based comments, questions, clarifications, or criticisms concerning articles published in RESONA.

This policy establishes procedures for submitting, evaluating, responding to, and, where appropriate, publishing post-publication discussions.

The policy follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly those concerning post-publication discussions, corrections, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

2. Purpose of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion provides an opportunity to critically examine and further develop the scholarly knowledge presented in published articles.

The objectives of this policy include:

1. Encouraging constructive academic dialogue concerning published articles.
2. Providing opportunities for readers to question or clarify reported methods, findings, and interpretations.
3. Supporting transparency and accountability in community service publications.
4. Identifying factual inaccuracies, methodological limitations, or incomplete reporting.
5. Facilitating scholarly responses and explanations from the original authors.
6. Supporting appropriate corrections when errors are identified.
7. Maintaining the reliability, accuracy, and integrity of the published scholarly record.

3. Scope of Post-Publication Discussion

RESONA welcomes scholarly discussions concerning the academic content, methodological quality, ethical considerations, and practical implications of published community service articles.

Eligible discussion topics may include:

1. The appropriateness of community service methods and intervention approaches.
2. The accuracy and completeness of reported implementation procedures.
3. The validity and interpretation of community service evaluation results.
4. The involvement and participation of community partners.
5. The effectiveness and sustainability of community empowerment programs.
6. Alternative interpretations of findings or recommendations.
7. Limitations, contextual factors, or challenges affecting reported outcomes.
8. Ethical considerations involving participants, community partners, or supporting institutions.
9. The accuracy of references, tables, figures, and other scholarly information.

Submissions must be relevant to the content of the published article and should contribute to an informed and constructive scholarly discussion.

4. Forms of Post-Publication Discussion

Post-publication discussion may take the following forms:

1. Letter to the Editor: A focused scholarly communication presenting questions, constructive criticism, additional evidence, or alternative interpretations concerning a published article.
2. Scholarly Commentary: An evidence-based discussion offering further analysis, contextual interpretation, or practical implications related to a published community service article.
3. Author Response: A written response from the original authors addressing substantive questions or criticisms raised after publication.
4. Clarification: An explanation concerning specific aspects of a published article that require additional information without necessarily changing its scientific conclusions.
5. Research Integrity Concern: A report concerning potential errors, plagiarism, data irregularities, ethical violations, misleading documentation, or other matters affecting the integrity of a published article.

Research integrity allegations are handled through the journal's Allegations of Research Misconduct and related publication ethics procedures rather than automatically being published as scholarly commentary.

Letters, commentaries, and author responses may be considered for publication following appropriate editorial evaluation. Such correspondence is not automatically accepted for publication.

5. Submission of Post-Publication Comments

Readers, authors, researchers, reviewers, community partners, and other interested parties may submit post-publication comments through the official RESONA Editorial Office.

Submissions should include:

1. The title and DOI or URL of the published article concerned.
2. The name and contact information of the person submitting the comment.
3. A clear description of the question, criticism, clarification, or issue raised.
4. Relevant evidence, references, or supporting documentation.
5. Any relevant competing interests or relationships with the authors or reported activities.
6. A statement explaining the scholarly relevance of the comment.

Post-publication comments may be submitted through the journal's official contact page or editorial email.

Editorial Email: resona@stiem.ac.id

Official Contact Page:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

Suggested Email Subject: Post-Publication Discussion - [Article Title or DOI].

6. Requirements for Scholarly Comments

All post-publication submissions must comply with the principles of academic professionalism, respectful communication, transparency, and evidence-based argumentation.

Submitted comments should:

1. Address the scholarly content of the published article rather than the personal characteristics of its authors.
2. Present clear and specific arguments supported by appropriate evidence.
3. Use professional, respectful, and constructive academic language.
4. Avoid unsupported allegations, discriminatory statements, personal attacks, and defamatory content.
5. Respect the confidentiality and privacy of community participants.
6. Disclose relevant conflicts of interest.
7. Comply with applicable copyright and publication ethics requirements.

RESONA reserves the right to decline comments that are irrelevant, promotional, abusive, repetitive, unsupported, or otherwise inconsistent with scholarly communication standards.

Anonymous reports involving credible research integrity concerns may be assessed confidentially when supported by specific and verifiable evidence.

7. Editorial Assessment Procedures

All submitted post-publication discussions will be assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized member of the editorial team.

The editorial assessment may involve:

1. Confirming that the submission relates to an article published in RESONA.
2. Evaluating the scholarly relevance, clarity, and supporting evidence of the comment.
3. Assessing compliance with publication ethics and communication standards.
4. Determining whether additional clarification or documentation is necessary.
5. Inviting the original authors to respond when appropriate.
6. Seeking independent expert evaluation or additional peer review where necessary.
7. Determining whether the discussion should be published, addressed privately, or referred to another editorial procedure.

The editorial team may request revisions to comments or responses before considering them for publication.

Editorial decisions will be based on scholarly relevance, supporting evidence, ethical compliance, and the potential contribution of the discussion to the published literature.

8. Author Responses and Right of Reply

When a post-publication comment raises substantive questions or criticisms concerning a published article, the editorial team may invite the original authors to provide a written response.

Authors should address the issues raised in a constructive, accurate, and evidence-based manner.

The editorial team may request additional information, original data, implementation records, or supporting documents when necessary to clarify the reported findings.

Where appropriate, both the scholarly comment and the authors' response may be published to support transparent academic discussion.

The absence of an author response does not prevent the editorial team from assessing credible concerns or taking appropriate action to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

9. Community Partner Feedback

As a journal focusing on community service and community empowerment, RESONA recognizes the importance of feedback from community partners and beneficiaries regarding published accounts of activities involving their communities.

Community partners may communicate concerns or clarifications regarding:

1. The accuracy of descriptions of community service activities.
2. The representation of partner institutions and participating communities.
3. The accuracy of reported participation, implementation procedures, and outcomes.
4. The use of participant photographs, statements, or other documentation.
5. The interpretation of community needs, experiences, and program benefits.

Such feedback will be evaluated according to its relevance, credibility, and supporting evidence.

Where concerns involve privacy, consent, or research integrity, the editorial team will apply the relevant publication ethics procedures and take reasonable measures to protect affected individuals.

10. Corrections and Clarifications

When post-publication discussion identifies a factual, methodological, bibliographic, or reporting error, RESONA will assess whether a formal correction or clarification is necessary.

Corrections may be issued when errors affect the accuracy or completeness of the publication but do not invalidate the principal findings or conclusions.

Where a formal correction is required, the journal will seek to publish a clearly identified notice linked to the original article.

Substantive changes to the published scholarly record should not be made silently or without appropriate documentation.

All corrections will be handled in accordance with the journal's Publication Ethics and Article Retraction Policy.

11. Allegations Affecting Publication Integrity

Post-publication discussions may identify serious concerns regarding the reliability, authenticity, or ethical integrity of a published article.

Such concerns may include suspected plagiarism, fabricated data, falsified community service documentation, inappropriate image manipulation, misleading authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or violations of participant privacy.

When credible concerns arise, RESONA will evaluate them under its Allegations of Research Misconduct and other relevant editorial policies.

Depending on the findings and seriousness of the issue, appropriate editorial actions may include:

1. Requesting clarification or supporting evidence.
2. Publishing a correction or clarification.
3. Issuing an Expression of Concern when serious questions remain unresolved.
4. Retracting a published article when its reliability or integrity has been seriously compromised.
5. Referring matters to relevant institutions or authorities when formal investigation is necessary.

An allegation alone does not establish misconduct. All concerns must be evaluated fairly, objectively, and on the basis of available evidence.

12. Publication and Accessibility of Discussions

When a post-publication discussion is accepted for publication, RESONA will seek to ensure that the discussion is clearly identified and appropriately connected to the original article.

Published comments and author responses may be presented as scholarly correspondence, editorial notices, or other suitable publication formats, depending on the journal's editorial arrangements and technical capabilities.

Where applicable, formal notices and published correspondence should include appropriate bibliographic information and persistent identifiers.

The journal will seek to maintain transparent links between original articles and related corrections, discussions, responses, expressions of concern, or retraction notices.

Publication of formal scholarly discussions is subject to editorial approval and the journal's available publishing infrastructure.

13. Confidentiality and Fair Treatment

RESONA is committed to fair and responsible management of post-publication discussions.

All involved parties should be treated respectfully, and editorial decisions must be based on the substance and evidence of the issues raised.

Confidential information, including unpublished data, personal information, and sensitive community records, must be protected in accordance with the journal's Privacy Statement and applicable legal or institutional requirements.

When comments involve allegations of misconduct, confidentiality will be maintained as appropriate during the editorial assessment or investigation.

Editors with relevant conflicts of interest must not independently handle discussions concerning articles in which they have a personal, professional, or financial interest.

14. Appeals and Editorial Decisions

Individuals who disagree with an editorial decision concerning a post-publication comment may submit a written request for reconsideration through the journal's official contact channels.

Requests for reconsideration should explain the grounds for appeal and provide relevant supporting evidence.

Where appropriate, the matter may be reviewed by another authorized editor or an independent representative of the publisher.

The editorial team will assess appeals fairly and proportionately while maintaining its responsibility to protect the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record.

15. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to supporting transparent scholarly dialogue and responsible post-publication evaluation.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, Conflict of Interest Policy, Plagiarism Policy, Allegations of Research Misconduct, Privacy Statement, and Article Retraction Policy.

The journal may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards, COPE guidance, institutional requirements, and digital publishing technologies.

Questions or requests concerning published articles may be directed to the RESONA Editorial Office.

RESONA Editorial Office:
resona@stiem.ac.id
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

REVIEW PROCESS POLICY

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining a rigorous, fair, independent, transparent, and ethical peer review process to ensure the scholarly quality and integrity of its published articles.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the initial editorial requirements and are considered suitable for further evaluation undergo peer review before a final publication decision is made.

The review process aims to evaluate the originality, scholarly contribution, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, and relevance of manuscripts to community service, community engagement, and community empowerment.

The journal follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), emphasizing editorial independence, reviewer confidentiality, objectivity, responsible scholarly judgment, and transparent decision-making.

2. Peer Review Model

RESONA adopts a double-blind peer review model, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during manuscript evaluation.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant academic or professional expertise.

Reviewers are selected based on their subject expertise, experience, independence, and ability to provide objective scholarly assessments.

Authors are responsible for preparing manuscripts for anonymous review by removing identifying information from the blinded manuscript file, where required by the journal's submission instructions.

Reviewer identities and confidential review reports are not publicly disclosed unless a specific disclosure has been appropriately authorized and complies with the journal's editorial policies.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

Following manuscript submission through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript meets the journal's basic requirements.

The initial assessment includes consideration of:

1. Relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope.
2. Compliance with the journal's Author Guidelines and manuscript template.
3. Originality and compliance with the Plagiarism Policy.
4. Completeness and clarity of the manuscript.
5. Appropriateness of the community service activities reported.
6. Availability of adequate information concerning implementation methods and results.
7. Compliance with research integrity, publication ethics, and applicable ethical requirements.
8. Completeness of relevant author declarations and disclosures.

Manuscripts that do not meet essential requirements may be returned to authors for correction or rejected without external peer review.

Editorial screening is intended to ensure that manuscripts entering peer review demonstrate appropriate relevance, scholarly quality, and compliance with the journal's submission standards.

4. Reviewer Selection and Assignment

Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor based on the subject matter and methodological characteristics of the submitted manuscript.

Reviewers should possess relevant expertise in community service, community development, education, social sciences, applied technology, business, health promotion, or other disciplines consistent with the journal's scope.

Reviewer selection considers:

1. Academic or professional expertise relevant to the manuscript.
2. Experience in scholarly research, community engagement, or publication evaluation.
3. Independence from the authors and their reported activities.
4. Absence of relevant conflicts of interest.
5. Ability to complete the review within the agreed timeframe.
6. Commitment to confidentiality and ethical peer review.

The editorial team may invite additional reviewers when specialist expertise is required, reviewer recommendations are substantially inconsistent, or further independent evaluation is necessary.

Reviewer recommendations provided by authors, if permitted, do not determine reviewer assignment. The editorial team retains full responsibility for selecting independent and qualified reviewers.

5. Criteria for Manuscript Evaluation

Peer reviewers are expected to conduct a comprehensive and constructive evaluation of the submitted manuscript.

The evaluation should consider the following criteria:

1. Relevance and Originality: The manuscript addresses relevant community needs and presents an identifiable scholarly or practical contribution.
2. Clarity of Community Problems and Objectives: The manuscript clearly explains the community context, partner needs, program objectives, and expected contributions.
3. Appropriateness of Methods: The community service approach, implementation procedures, participants, activities, and evaluation methods are sufficiently described and suitable for the stated objectives.
4. Community Participation: The manuscript adequately explains the involvement, contribution, and engagement of community partners or beneficiaries.
5. Results and Supporting Evidence: The reported activities, outputs, and outcomes are supported by credible data, documentation, observations, or other appropriate evidence.
6. Discussion and Interpretation: The findings are critically interpreted and connected to relevant scholarly literature and community development needs.
7. Practical Contribution and Sustainability: The manuscript explains the benefits, limitations, and potential continuity or wider application of the community service activities.
8. Ethical Compliance: The manuscript respects relevant ethical requirements, including informed consent, participant privacy, accurate documentation, and responsible reporting.
9. Writing and Presentation: The article demonstrates clarity, coherence, appropriate references, and conformity with the journal's formatting requirements.

Reviewers must assess manuscripts based on scholarly merit and the credibility of the evidence rather than personal preferences or institutional affiliations.

6. Reviewer Responsibilities and Ethical Conduct

Peer reviewers play an essential role in supporting the journal's editorial decisions and improving the quality of submitted manuscripts.

Reviewers are expected to:

1. Accept review invitations only when they possess appropriate expertise and sufficient time.
2. Maintain strict confidentiality regarding manuscripts and editorial correspondence.
3. Provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and respectful evaluations.
4. Declare relevant financial, personal, institutional, or professional conflicts of interest.
5. Notify the editor promptly if they identify suspected plagiarism, fabricated data, misleading documentation, or other publication ethics concerns.
6. Avoid using unpublished manuscript information for personal or professional advantage.
7. Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or promptly inform the editor of unavoidable delays.
8. Refrain from communicating directly with authors about the submitted manuscript without editorial authorization.
9. Comply with the journal's Generative AI Policy and confidentiality requirements.

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished review materials to unauthorized Generative AI platforms.

Reviewers who identify a significant conflict of interest must notify the editorial team so that an appropriate decision concerning their involvement can be made.

7. Peer Review Recommendations

Following evaluation, reviewers are requested to provide clear comments, constructive recommendations, and an overall assessment of the manuscript.

Reviewer recommendations may include:

1. Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication, subject to any necessary editorial corrections.
2. Minor Revision: The manuscript requires limited improvements that do not substantially alter its content or principal findings.
3. Major Revision: The manuscript requires significant improvements in its methodology, analysis, reporting, interpretation, or scholarly presentation.
4. Reject: The manuscript has substantial limitations, does not satisfy the journal's requirements, or is unsuitable for publication.

Reviewer recommendations are advisory and do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

The Editor-in-Chief or authorized handling editor considers the reviewer reports, manuscript quality, publication ethics requirements, and journal policies before making a decision.

8. Editorial Decision-Making

Editorial decisions are made independently by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized editor based on scholarly evidence, reviewer assessments, and the journal's editorial standards.

Possible editorial decisions include acceptance, revision, additional review, or rejection.

When reviewer recommendations differ substantially, the handling editor may seek further clarification, consult an additional independent reviewer, or conduct further editorial assessment.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, or individuals with relevant editorial relationships must be assigned to an independent editor who has no significant conflict of interest.

The payment of Article Processing Charges, the authors' academic rank, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships must not influence editorial decisions.

The journal does not guarantee manuscript acceptance or publication.

9. Manuscript Revision and Re-Review

When revision is required, authors receive relevant reviewer comments and editorial instructions through the journal's official communication system.

Authors are expected to address the comments carefully and revise their manuscripts accordingly.

Revised submissions should include:

1. A revised manuscript incorporating appropriate corrections and improvements.
2. A point-by-point response to reviewer and editor comments.
3. A clear explanation of any reviewer recommendations that have not been adopted.
4. Additional supporting information or documentation when requested.

The editorial team evaluates revised manuscripts to determine whether the requested improvements have been adequately addressed.

Manuscripts requiring major revisions may be returned to the original reviewers or assigned to additional reviewers when further scholarly evaluation is necessary.

A request for revision does not guarantee subsequent acceptance.

10. Review Timeline and Communication

RESONA seeks to manage manuscript evaluation efficiently while maintaining appropriate scholarly and ethical standards.

The duration of the review process may vary according to manuscript quality, reviewer availability, the complexity of the subject matter, the number of revision rounds, and the time required for author responses.

Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the period agreed upon when accepting the review invitation.

Authors will be informed of editorial decisions and revision requirements through the journal's official communication channels.

When substantial delays occur, authors may contact the editorial office to request an update on the manuscript's status.

The journal does not guarantee a fixed review completion date or a specific publication date for individual submissions.

11. Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

RESONA is committed to identifying and appropriately addressing concerns regarding scholarly integrity throughout the review process.

Potential concerns may include plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, misleading community service documentation, unethical participant involvement, undisclosed conflicts of interest, inappropriate authorship, or misuse of Generative AI.

When serious concerns arise, the editorial team may request additional evidence, suspend manuscript evaluation, consult relevant experts, or refer the matter to appropriate institutions.

Suspected misconduct will be handled in accordance with the journal's Plagiarism Policy, Allegations of Research Misconduct, Conflict of Interest Policy, Generative AI Policy, and other applicable editorial procedures.

Allegations must be assessed objectively, and authors should receive an appropriate opportunity to provide clarification before a finding of misconduct is made.

12. Confidentiality and Protection of Manuscript Information

All manuscripts submitted to RESONA are treated as confidential scholarly documents during editorial screening and peer review.

Editors and reviewers must not disclose unpublished manuscript content, confidential evaluation reports, or private editorial communications to unauthorized individuals.

Information obtained during manuscript evaluation must not be used for personal advantage or to disadvantage the authors.

Confidential information concerning community participants, partner institutions, or unpublished data must be handled in accordance with the journal's Privacy Statement and applicable ethical requirements.

13. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision has involved a significant procedural error, undisclosed conflict of interest, or substantial misunderstanding may submit a written appeal to the RESONA Editorial Office.

An appeal should provide a clear explanation of the concern and relevant supporting information.

Appeals will be considered by the Editor-in-Chief or another qualified and independent editor when appropriate.

An appeal does not automatically result in reconsideration by external reviewers or reversal of the original editorial decision.

Complaints concerning reviewer behavior, editorial confidentiality, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics will be addressed through the relevant journal policies.

14. Final Acceptance and Publication

A manuscript may be accepted for publication after the editorial team determines that it meets the journal's scholarly, methodological, ethical, and presentation standards.

Following acceptance, the manuscript may proceed through copyediting, layout preparation, proofreading, metadata preparation, and other publication production procedures.

Authors may be requested to review proofs or correct production-related errors before publication.

Accepted articles are published through the journal's official website in accordance with its Publication Schedule, Copyright Notice, Open Access Policy, and other applicable publication requirements.

15. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining an ethical, constructive, and transparent peer review process that supports the publication of reliable and meaningful community service scholarship.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Author Guidelines, Publication Ethics, Manuscript Types, Plagiarism Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, Generative AI Policy, and Allegations of Research Misconduct.

The journal may periodically evaluate and update its peer review procedures to reflect developments in scholarly publishing standards, ethical guidance, and editorial management practices.

Questions concerning the review process may be directed to the RESONA Editorial Office.

Official Editorial Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

References and Ethical Guidelines

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9
3. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12

ARTICLE RETRACTION

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat

Publisher: Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia.

1. General Policy

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to maintaining the accuracy, reliability, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal recognizes that published articles may occasionally require correction, an Expression of Concern, or retraction when serious problems are identified after publication.

Article retraction is a formal mechanism for informing the scholarly community that a published article contains findings, data, or other content that can no longer be considered reliable, or that serious research or publication ethics violations have compromised the integrity of the publication.

The principal purpose of retraction is to correct the scholarly record and protect readers, researchers, practitioners, community partners, and other stakeholders from relying on unreliable or misleading information. Retraction is not intended primarily as a punishment against authors.

This policy follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Retraction Guidelines, Version 3 (August 2025), and relevant international standards concerning research integrity and scholarly publishing.

2. Grounds for Article Retraction

RESONA may retract a published article when sufficient evidence establishes that the article's findings, conclusions, or publication integrity have been seriously compromised.

Grounds for retraction may include:

1. Fabrication: Inventing data, participants, activities, observations, evaluation results, or other information and presenting them as genuine.
2. Falsification: Manipulating research data, community service outcomes, photographs, documents, or other evidence in a manner that misrepresents the reported work.
3. Substantial Plagiarism: Using significant portions of another person's scholarly work, ideas, data, or materials without appropriate acknowledgment or authorization.
4. Duplicate or Redundant Publication: Publishing substantially identical work without appropriate disclosure, permission, or scholarly justification.
5. Unreliable Findings: Serious errors in data collection, analysis, evaluation, or interpretation that invalidate the article's principal findings or conclusions.
6. Unethical Practices: Serious violations involving informed consent, participant privacy, ethical permissions, or the rights and welfare of individuals participating in community service activities.
7. Manipulated Peer Review: Fraudulent reviewer identities, fabricated review reports, or other serious interference with the journal's editorial evaluation process.
8. Authorship Misrepresentation: Serious cases of fictitious authorship, identity misuse, or other authorship manipulation affecting the integrity of the publication.
9. Undisclosed Competing Interests: Significant conflicts of interest that materially compromise the reliability or interpretation of the reported work.
10. Unauthorized Use of Materials: Serious misuse of copyrighted materials, confidential information, personal data, or other content without appropriate permission or authorization.
11. Misuse of Generative AI: The use of Generative Artificial Intelligence to fabricate findings, references, community service documentation, participant information, or other essential scholarly evidence.

Retraction may be appropriate regardless of whether the underlying unreliability resulted from deliberate misconduct or an honest error.

The journal will assess each case individually and will not automatically retract an article solely because an allegation has been submitted.

3. Retraction of Community Service Publications

As a journal specializing in community service and community empowerment, RESONA places particular importance on the authenticity of reported activities, community participation, implementation procedures, and evaluation outcomes.

Retraction may be considered when serious evidence shows that:

1. A reported community service program was not actually implemented.
2. Community partners, beneficiaries, participants, or activity locations were fabricated or materially misrepresented.
3. Attendance records, training assessments, questionnaires, interviews, observations, or other evaluation data were falsified.
4. Photographs or visual documentation were fabricated or improperly reused to misrepresent community service implementation.
5. Program outcomes or community impacts were deliberately misrepresented or were based on fundamentally unreliable evidence.
6. The article contains serious ethical violations involving the use of community members' personal information, photographs, or participation records.
7. The same community service activity and substantially the same findings were published repeatedly without appropriate disclosure or justification.

Authors must ensure that published reports accurately reflect the activities implemented and that conclusions concerning community empowerment, training effectiveness, technology transfer, or social impact are supported by credible evidence.

When the reliability of a published article is questioned, the editorial team may request relevant supporting documentation, including implementation records, evaluation instruments, original data, community partner confirmation, or other appropriate evidence.

4. Distinction Between Correction, Expression of Concern, and Retraction

RESONA distinguishes between different post-publication actions according to the nature, severity, and evidentiary status of the identified concern.

A. Correction

A correction may be issued when a published article contains an identifiable error that requires amendment but does not invalidate its principal findings or overall conclusions. Such errors may include incorrect bibliographic information, limited numerical mistakes, figure labeling errors, or other issues that can be appropriately corrected.

B. Expression of Concern

An Expression of Concern may be issued when serious questions arise regarding the reliability or integrity of an article, but the available evidence is insufficient or an investigation remains unresolved. The notice informs readers of the concern without prematurely determining that misconduct occurred.

C. Retraction

A retraction may be issued when sufficient evidence establishes that an article contains fundamentally unreliable findings or serious publication integrity problems that cannot be adequately addressed through a correction.

Scientific disagreement, different interpretations, or subsequent findings that contradict an article do not automatically justify retraction when the original work was reported reliably and ethically.

5. Initiation of the Retraction Process

Concerns that may lead to article retraction can be raised by authors, editors, reviewers, readers, academic institutions, community partners, funding organizations, or other individuals with relevant information.

The journal may also initiate an assessment when serious concerns are identified through post-publication review, editorial monitoring, or information received from relevant institutions.

Reports concerning a published article should include, where possible:

1. The title, author names, DOI, or URL of the article concerned.
2. A clear description of the suspected problem.
3. Relevant documentary evidence, references, or supporting information.
4. Identification of the data, figures, statements, or procedures associated with the concern.
5. Contact information for follow-up communication, where available.

Credible anonymous allegations may be assessed when they provide sufficiently specific and verifiable information.

All reports should be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact channels.

6. Preliminary Assessment and Investigation

Upon receiving a credible concern, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized independent editor will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine the relevance, seriousness, and available evidence of the reported issue.

Where further investigation is justified, the editorial team may:

1. Examine the published article and relevant supporting materials.
2. Review original data, images, activity documentation, or other evidence.
3. Request written clarification from the authors.
4. Consult independent experts when specialist evaluation is necessary.
5. Review relevant editorial, submission, and peer review records.
6. Seek information from community partners or institutions when appropriate and ethically permissible.
7. Refer serious allegations to the relevant institutional authorities when formal investigation is required.

The investigation must be conducted fairly, objectively, confidentially, and proportionately to the seriousness of the concern.

Authors should ordinarily be informed of substantive allegations and provided with an appropriate opportunity to respond.

The journal will distinguish established facts from allegations that remain unverified.

7. Editorial Decision and Independence

The decision to retract a published article rests with the Editor-in-Chief or another authorized independent editor acting within the journal's editorial governance arrangements.

The publisher may support the investigation, provide administrative or legal assistance, and facilitate communication, but editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial, financial, institutional, or personal interests.

When the Editor-in-Chief has a relevant conflict of interest, the matter must be assigned to an appropriately qualified and independent editor or authorized representative.

The editorial team will consider the reliability of the available evidence, the seriousness of the identified issues, the authors' explanations, and applicable publication ethics guidance before reaching a decision.

Agreement from every author is not a prerequisite for retraction when the journal has sufficient grounds to conclude that retraction is necessary.

The journal should issue a retraction promptly once a sufficiently supported decision has been reached.

8. Retraction Notice

When an article is retracted, RESONA will publish a formal and clearly identified Retraction Notice.

The Retraction Notice should include:

1. The heading Retraction or Retraction Notice.
2. The complete title of the affected article.
3. The names of the original authors.
4. The article's publication details, including volume, issue, publication year, and DOI where available.
5. A clear explanation of the reasons for retraction, to the extent supported by the evidence and appropriate legal or confidentiality considerations.
6. Identification of the party issuing the retraction, such as the authors, Editor-in-Chief, or journal editorial team.
7. The publication date of the Retraction Notice.
8. A direct link to the original article.

The Retraction Notice must be publicly accessible without a subscription or payment requirement.

The notice should distinguish, where supported by the evidence, between unreliability arising from honest error and problems associated with established misconduct.

Retraction notices must use clear, factual, and proportionate language and must avoid unsupported accusations.

9. Preservation and Identification of Retracted Articles

RESONA is committed to preserving the transparency and integrity of the scholarly record.

Retracted articles should ordinarily remain accessible through the journal's online archive, with a prominent indication that the article has been retracted.

The journal will seek to implement the following measures:

1. Clearly marking the article's online landing page with its retraction status.
2. Displaying an appropriate retraction statement on the published full-text file, where technically feasible.
3. Linking the Retraction Notice to the original article.
4. Providing a reciprocal link from the original article to the Retraction Notice.
5. Preserving the bibliographic information and DOI of the original publication.
6. Updating relevant article metadata and registration records, where supported by the journal's publishing infrastructure and DOI registration services.
7. Maintaining access to the Retraction Notice as part of the permanent journal archive.

Retraction does not ordinarily require deletion of the original article. Keeping the scholarly record visible allows readers to understand the publication history and reasons for the editorial action.

Complete removal of article content may be considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as compelling legal requirements, serious privacy violations, or significant risks to individuals. In such circumstances, an appropriate bibliographic record and explanatory notice should be retained where legally permissible.

10. DOI and Indexing Updates

When an article is retracted, RESONA will seek to ensure that the retraction status is accurately reflected in relevant publication records and metadata.

Where supported by the journal's registration services and technical infrastructure, the editorial team may update Crossref metadata or register relevant relationships between the original article and the Retraction Notice.

The original article's DOI should remain associated with its publication record rather than being reassigned to a different article.

The journal may also communicate retraction information to relevant indexing and abstracting services where appropriate.

The use of Crossmark or another specialized publication update service is subject to the journal's actual technical arrangements and service availability.

11. Author-Initiated Retraction Requests

Authors who identify serious errors or integrity concerns in their own published articles are encouraged to contact the RESONA Editorial Office promptly.

A request for retraction should explain the problem, its consequences for the article's reliability, and the available supporting evidence.

The editorial team will assess author-initiated requests using the same scholarly and ethical standards applied to concerns raised by other parties.

An author request does not automatically result in retraction if the identified issue can be adequately addressed through a correction or another appropriate editorial action.

The journal encourages authors to report honest errors without unnecessary delay in order to protect readers and maintain the reliability of the scholarly literature.

12. Retraction Following Institutional Investigations

RESONA may cooperate with universities, research institutions, ethics committees, funding bodies, or other relevant authorities when an article raises serious concerns that require institutional investigation.

The journal may consider verified institutional findings when determining whether correction, an Expression of Concern, or retraction is appropriate.

However, the journal may act independently when sufficient evidence establishes that a published article is unreliable, even if an institutional investigation has not yet been completed.

The journal's responsibility is to maintain the reliability of the published scholarly record, while institutional disciplinary matters remain within the authority of the relevant institutions.

13. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors or other directly affected individuals may submit a written appeal concerning a retraction decision through the journal's official contact channels.

Appeals should provide specific reasons for reconsideration and any relevant additional evidence.

Where appropriate, the appeal will be evaluated by an independent editor or authorized representative who has no relevant conflict of interest.

Submitting an appeal does not automatically suspend an editorial action considered necessary to protect the scholarly record.

When new and reliable evidence warrants reconsideration, the journal may issue an additional editorial notice explaining the outcome.

14. Confidentiality, Fairness, and Record Keeping

RESONA will handle retraction-related allegations, investigations, and correspondence fairly and with appropriate confidentiality.

The editorial team will seek to protect the privacy of community participants, reporting parties, authors, reviewers, and other individuals involved in investigations.

Relevant evidence, editorial correspondence, investigation outcomes, and decisions should be documented and securely retained in accordance with applicable institutional procedures and data protection requirements.

Retraction decisions must not be influenced by Article Processing Charges, institutional affiliations, authors' academic positions, or other inappropriate considerations.

The journal will seek to ensure that the public explanation of a retraction is sufficiently informative while avoiding disclosure of unnecessary confidential or personal information.

15. Policy Implementation and Review

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat is committed to managing article retractions responsibly, transparently, and in accordance with recognized scholarly publishing standards.

This policy should be read together with the journal's Publication Ethics, Plagiarism Policy, Allegations of Research Misconduct, Conflict of Interest Policy, Generative AI Policy, Post-Publication Discussion, Archiving, and other applicable editorial policies.

The journal may periodically review and update this policy to reflect developments in COPE guidance, publishing technologies, institutional requirements, and relevant legal obligations.

Questions, concerns, or requests regarding article retraction may be submitted to the RESONA Editorial Office.

Official Journal Contact:
https://journal.stiem.ac.id/index.php/resona/about/contact

References and Ethical Guidelines

1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Retraction Guidelines, Version 3 (August 2025). https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
2. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
3. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Scientific Misconduct, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction. ICMJE Recommendations
4. Crossref. Version Control, Corrections, and Retractions. Crossref Publication Updates

OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION

RESONA: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Masyarakat (p-ISSN: 2598-3946; e-ISSN: 2614-2481) is a peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal institutionally affiliated with Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, Indonesia. The journal publishes original scholarly articles reporting community service, community engagement, community empowerment, and the practical application of knowledge and technology for community development.

Following the institutional transformation from Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi (STIE) Muhammadiyah Palopo to Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo, RESONA is currently managed and published by the Lembaga Penerbitan dan Publikasi Ilmiah (LPPI), Universitas Muhammadiyah Palopo.

RESONA operates under the editorial leadership of Puspa Sari, S.Pd., M.Pd., as Editor-in-Chief, supported by an Editorial Team consisting of academics and researchers from various institutions and disciplinary backgrounds relevant to community service and community development.

The publisher provides institutional and administrative support for journal management, publication services, digital infrastructure, and the continuity of scholarly publishing. The Editorial Team is responsible for manuscript evaluation, peer review coordination, editorial quality assurance, and publication decisions.

RESONA is committed to maintaining editorial independence. Decisions concerning manuscript evaluation, peer review, acceptance, rejection, and publication are based on scholarly quality, originality, methodological appropriateness, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope. Editorial decisions must remain free from inappropriate institutional, financial, commercial, or personal influence.

Ownership and Management Details

For additional information regarding the journal's editorial management, please visit the Editorial Team and Journal Contact pages.