text:
Don't have any account? click Register
All Authors Title Abstract Index terms Full Text Advanced Search »
Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia
e-ISSN 2615-2894 print ISSN 2301-9816
Home > About the Journal > Editorial Policies
Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia (JKI) publishes research articles from various topics in communication sciences. The journal is an interdisciplinary space that accommodates this research related to communication and media; which includes, but is not limited to, interpersonal communication, mass communication, advertising, communication strategies, and media studies. JKI strives to serve as a major vehicle for the exchange of ideas and research among communication scholars.
Introduction From The Editor
Open Submissions Indexed Peer Reviewed
The journal employs peer-review mechanism where each submited article should be anonimously reviewed by expert peers appointed by the editor. All manuscript submissions will be initially screened whether the manuscript has follow journal scope and author guidelines. All submitted manuscript will be screened using iThenticate for plagiarism checking before being sent to reviewers. Manuscript exceeding 30% in a plagiarism check will be automatically rejected.
The manuscript will be sent to section editor and will be reviewed by at least two anonymous reviewers. Every manuscript submitted to the JKI will go through an Editorial Review and Double Blind Peer Reviews. The decision on one manuscript is made by the Editorial Board meeting. The decision would be based on the advice from the reviewers and could categorized into: (1) Acceptable for publication without changes; (2) Acceptable for publications after minor revisions; (3) Acceptable for publication after major revisions; (4) Not acceptable for publication, but author(s) should be encouraged to resubmit; and (5) Reject.
This journal is scheduled for publication two times a year, April and October. Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia (JKI) is electronically published via the journal website (www.journal.ui.ac.id/jkmi)
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. All articles published Open Access are immediately and permanently free for everyone to read and download.
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...
Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia (JKI) adopted the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines in order to take all possible measures against malpractice and ensure best practices in publication ethics. Publication ethics and best practices to prevent malpractices are implemented with the regard to the editorial team, authors and peer-reviewers.
DUTIES OF THE EDITORIAL
The editors of a peer-reviewed journal are accountable and responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The decision shall be guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board, and should be based exclusively on the academic merit and the recommendations of the reviewers.
Editors should evaluate manuscripts for those intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Editors should make fair and unbiased decisions independent of commercial considerations, and should ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process.
All manuscripts submitted for peer-review are kept strictly confidential. The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.
Dealing with fundamental errors
When a substantial error or inaccuracy has been discovered in a published work (with or without the author notifying it), the Editorial Team will cooperate with the author to withdraw or correct the paper accordingly. If appropriate, the editors will correct the published material and include a dated erratum.
Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
Multiple submissions
Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Plagiarism and originality
The authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Participation in peer review process
Authors should be obliged to participate in peer review process. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editors.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript.
Reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.
Privileged information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Jurnal Komunikasi Indonesia (JKI) There are no charges for the submission of a manuscript and no charges for article processing, the publication of manuscripts or the color reproduction of photographs, and the Journal does not charge readers or institutions for access. However, printed or reprinted materials are supplied at cost.
Published by: Departemen Ilmu Komunikasi, FISIP Universitas Indonesia
Address : Jl. Prof. Dr. Selo Soemardjan, Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik (FISIP UI), Universitas Indonesia, Pd. Cina, Beji, Kota Depok, Jawa Barat 16424
Phone: 021 78849014; 021 78849015; 021 78849018 Fax: 021 78849019


Download "6.2 The Economics of Ideas. 6.1 Introduction. Growth and Ideas. Ideas. The Romer model divides the world into objects and ideas: Chapter 6"
Problem 1. Steady state values for two countries with different savings rates and population growth rates.
Business Fluctuations. Notes 03. Preliminaries. Composition of GDP. Demand for Goods. Equilibrium Output Determination. Additional Topics.
In the basic Solow model, growth occurs only as a result of factor accumulation. 2. Capital is accumulated as a result of savings behaviour.
Chapter Which organization lends money to developing countries? A) EU. B) NAFTA. C) World Bank. D) WTO.
Macroeconomic Models of Economic Growth J.R. Walker U. of Wisconsin Human Resources and Economic Growth Transition: History to Contemporary Spent the last few lectures considering the Industrial Revolution.
Define and calculate the economic growth rate, and explain the implications of sustained growth.
In addition to the multiple choice and quantitative problems listed here, you should answer review questions 2, 4, 6, 7, 9; problems 1, 2, 3, 4.
Agenda. Long-Run Economic Growth, Part 2. The Solow Model. The Solow Model. Fundamental Determinants of Living Standards. Endogenous Growth Theory.


text:
Get Noticed for Your Contributions to the Profession
AAOHN Honors Outstanding OHNs
Each year AAOHN honors outstanding members for excellence in activities that promote, advance, guide and protect the occupational and environmental health nursing profession.
If you or someone you know is making a difference in the community, apply online for a 2020 Award by Friday, November 29.
Awards include acknowledgment and appreciation to individual active AAOHN members, chapters and an award to a supportive business. The 2020 AAOHN Awards are listed below.
UL Stewardship Award
AAOHN Business Recognition Award
AAOHN Fellowship
AAOHN Lillian G. Carter Humanitarian Award
AAOHN Chapter Awards
Learn more about the required materials, judging criteria and submission guidelines on the AAOHN website.
Released: October 23, 2019 01:26 PM | Updated: October 23, 2019 01:26 PM
Keywords: AAOHN News
The February Issue of Workplace Health & Safety Is Now Available Online
Updated 5:02PM EST, Wed Jan 15th, 2020
The February Issue of Workplace Health & Safety is now available online for on-demand viewing and if you purchased a print subscription, it will hit mailboxes in the next couple of weeks.
Pl...
AAOHN Legislative Affairs Alert
Updated 10:58AM EST, Tue Nov 19th, 2019
The AAOHN Legislative Affairs Advisory Group has been hard at work advocating for H.R. 1309, the Workplace Violence Prevention for Health Care and Social Service Workers Act. The advisory group has le...
Updated 1:26PM EDT, Wed Oct 23rd, 2019
If you or some...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Please note that the information for Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road and all other Offices is for reference only.
It is strongly recommended that you get in touch with the Office Tel.: 01273 425 700 before your visit to double-check the details and other questions you may have.
Apologies, this Office does not provide them with a holiday to the opening times. Please contact this Office directly Tel.: 01273 425 700 to check Opening hours.
Below you can see the information about the Office of Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road, including the location on Google maps, address and opening hours.
By clicking on the link: Edit details, to edit StreetName and number, Postcode, TelephoneNumber of Office Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road, write us your comments and suggestions.
You can zoom in or out to get the exact location of the Office Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road.
Nearest office Euro Car Parts, Nearest office In category of Car parts.
A more detailed map with all the Office Euro Car Parts Offices In Uk you will find by clicking on the link Euro Car Parts Locator.
Leave a comment about the Office Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road - Add a review, this will also help to other visitors to get more information about the Office Euro Car Parts In Brighton, Unit C4, Portland Business Park, Portland Road.


WSI is committed to protecting your privacy. This privacy statement explains data collection and use practices of this website (the "Site"). By accessing the Site, you are consenting to the information collection and use practices described in this privacy statement.
The information requested on this Site is required to process your request for more information about our company, services and products. Access to this information will be restricted to WSI employees, administrators or consultants who are responsible for the marketing and administration of WSI services. Your consent to the use of personal information to offer you products and services is optional, and if you wish to discontinue such use, contact us electronically.
We will not share your personal information with any 3rd parties.


By hitting submit you agree to the terms & conditions.
Please make sure to check availability before booking.
The ever-increasing cost of insurance, which allows us to offer camp fires in the first place.
We are surrounded by woodland, which is under threat from destructive diseases such as Dutch Elm, Ash Dieback and Bleeding Canker (Chestnuts). These may be spread by spores from burning wood and while we are sure our wood is disease-free, we will not take the risk on wood from unknown sources. (we lost 500 sapling trees to Ash dieback in 2018).
Some wood brought on to site, contains nails and other metal objects. These can kill grazing animals.


The big one. Now let's not beat around the bush here, you can punch into google the simple phrase that "how to write a story" and you will get thousands of results with posts and theories written by people who are more intelligent, smarter, experienced, and articulate than me. So why should I even bother? I think I should bother because I might have something different to say than people who've written about writing stories before me.
Writing a story is both a science and an art. There are technical aspects and there are emotional aspects, and a good story is a combination of both in the right degree. A story needs a soul, a story needs a voice, a story should say something more than what is being said on the page. Barring all these, a story should be entertaining, it should move the readers, it should delight and disgust them. Because every story is an escape. So, when you write, are you providing readers with that escape? Are you giving them something that is more interesting than their life might be? If not, then make it so. That is your job.
Most of all, a story poses a question and answers it. When writing your story, write down the question you want to ask. The bigger and most complex the question is, the better your answer will be. Read your favorite stories, think about the questions the writers were asking and how they've answered. More often than not, the question will be buried under layers of meaning and the answer will be out there in the pages. You might have to work your way backwards, but it's a learning process that we all need to go through.
Writing a story is difficult. So learn about it as much as you can. Find out all you can, and when you sit down to write. Just write. No distractions, no nothing till you've made your word count of the day. There will be better time to edit it.
A story is a journey and when you write the first word, know the end. Then use all the other words to reach it and make the journey as interesting as possible.
Now, near the end of this post, you might realize that I've said almost nothing about the technical aspects of writing a story. Because there is none. You can't write a good story in the first draft, and this is what participating in NaNoWriMo is about. Once you do it, you'll KNOW that you can write 50,000 words and then you'll KNOW that you can edit them too.
You might have something good at the end of it all, and you might not, but you'll always have the knowledge that you wrote 50k words in one month.
I wish you luck and swift fingers. May your muse sit on your head and beat you till you finish your word count.


(Montana Free Press) A Republican-sponsored bill to extend Montana's expanded Medicaid program was amended and then voted down on the Senate floor Thursday after five Republican co-sponsors defected in what some said was an effort to tie Medicaid expansion to passage of a "save Colstrip" bill.
Even so, lawmakers of both parties say they expect the Senate to reconsider the expansion measure, House Bill 658, Friday or Saturday and ultimately pass it in some form before the Legislature adjourns."I'm not worried, to be honest with you," said Rep. Mary Caferro, D-Helena, who sponsored the Democratic expansion measure ultimately scuttled in favor of HB 658.
HB 658, authored by Rep. Ed Buttrey, R-Great Falls, would extend the expanded Medicaid program created with the 2015 HELP Act, which uses federal money and some state funding to provide subsidized health insurance to nearly 100,000 low-income Montanans.
Unlike Caferro's measure, HB 658 includes work requirements and other provisions designed to make renewal more palatable to fiscal conservatives who are concerned about the bill's price tag and higher-than-expected enrollment numbers. The bill passed the House on a 61-39 vote March 30, attracting support from all 42 Democrats and 20 Republicans.
In the Senate, the expansion bill was caught up in the politics around another bill, Senate Bill 331.
Sponsored by Sen. Tom Richmond, R-Billings, that bill aims to help NorthWestern Energy secure a bigger stake in the Colstrip power plant. It has been criticized for undercutting the state Public Service Commission's ability to regulate how NorthWestern passes its costs on to ratepayers.
Richmond and nine other Republican senators, including prominent coal champion Sen. Duane Ankney, R-Colstrip, are listed as co-sponsors on the Medicaid expansion bill. Five of those co-sponsors — Richmond Ankney; Sen. Brian Hoven, R-Great Falls; Sen. Jeff Welborn, R-Dillon and Sen. Russ Tempel, R-Chester — voted against the expansion bill Thursday, stalling its second reading at a 25-25 vote.
"It looks like some of the co-sponsors were trying to get the attention of the [the governor]," Caferro said.
As the Republican-controlled Legislature enters the final weeks of the 2019 session, Medicaid expansion and another Democratic priority, a state-funded pre-kindergarten program, are seen as potential bargaining chips to pressure Gov. Steve Bullock, a Democrat, to support a revised version of the Colstrip bill.
In a press briefing Wednesday, Bullock wouldn't rule out signing SB 331 into law, particularly if it comes to his desk with amendments.
"I want to see how some other issues play out, before we get too far along," Richmond told reporters following the vote.
Ankney is a self-described member of the "Solutions Caucus," a group of moderate Republicans that has often sided with Democrats on major policy issues.
"Natural resources continues to pay a big share of everything we do in this state. But yet, the other side of the aisle don't want to support that," Ankney said.
"There were some amendments that we're dealing with," said Tempel, who admitted SB 331 factored into his vote against renewing Medicaid expansion.
"There's a lot of good stuff about the Medicaid bill," he said.
Reporter Leia Larsen contributed to this story. Eric Dietrich is a journalist and data designer based in Helena. He is the lead reporter on the Long Streets Project and also covers state policy for Montana Free Press, where this story originally appeared online.


text:
Q: I want to count number of points inside the given shape SeedRandom[1];
data = RandomReal[{-2, 2}, {1000, 2}];
ParametricPlot[{{2 r Cos[t], r Sin[t]}, {r Cos[t], 2 r Sin[t]}}, {t,
  0, 2 Pi}, {r, 0, 1}, Mesh -> False, Epilog -> {Blue, Point[data]}]

A: SeedRandom[1];
data = RandomReal[{-2, 2}, {1000, 2}];

r1 = ParametricRegion[{2 r Cos[t],
   r Sin[t]}, {{t, 0, 2 \[Pi]}, {r, 0, 1}}]
r2 = ParametricRegion[{r Cos[t],
   2 r Sin[t]}, {{t, 0, 2 \[Pi]}, {r, 0, 1}}]
RegionQ /@ {r1, r2}

{True, True}

pts1 = Select[data, RegionMember[r1]];
pts2 = Select[data, RegionMember[r2]]
pts3 = Select[data, RegionMember[RegionIntersection[r1, r2]]];

Length /@ {pts1, pts2, pts3}

{406, 395, 252}

Visualization:
rplot1 = RegionPlot[{r1, r2}, AspectRatio -> Automatic];
p1 = ListPlot[pts1, PlotStyle -> Black];
p2 = ListPlot[pts2, PlotStyle -> Darker@Green];
p3 = ListPlot[pts3, PlotStyle -> Red];
Show[rplot1, p1, p2, p3]

A: With the following test data:
SeedRandom[1];
data = RandomReal[{-2, 2}, {1000, 2}];

You may define a region using ParametricRegion:
pr = ParametricRegion[{2 r Cos[t], r Sin[t]}, {{t, 0, 2 Pi}, {r, 0, 1}}];

Then you may test if a point is inside the region using RegionMemberin its operator form:
RegionMember[pr] /@ data

This replaces every point by True if the point  is inside the region, False otherwise. Finally you may count how many "True" there are:
Count[RegionMember[pr] /@ data, True]
(* 406 *)

A: This exploits the simple nature of the regions and uses RegionMember:
   func[n_] := Module[{pts = RandomReal[{-2, 2}, {n, 2}],
   r1 = Disk[{0, 0}, {2, 1}],
   r2 = Disk[{0, 0}, {1, 2}], int, rf, gb, lp},
  int = RegionIntersection[r1, r2];
  rf[{x_, y_}] := RegionMember[int, {x, y}];
  gb = KeySort@GroupBy[pts, rf];
  lp = ListPlot[gb, PlotStyle -> {Red, Green}];
  Column[{
    Show[lp,
     ParametricPlot[{{2 Cos[t], Sin[t]}, { Cos[t], 2 Sin[t]}}, {t, 0,
       2 Pi}], Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{-2, 2}, {-2, 2}},
     PlotLabel -> Row[{"n=", n}]],
    Grid[{{"Test", rf[{x, y}]},
      {"Montecarlo Area", 16. #2/(#1 + #2) & @@ Length /@ gb},
      {"Analytic area", RegionMeasure[int, 2] // N}}]}]]

Simulating for sample sizes: {10, 50, 100, 500, 1000, 5000, 10000, 50000, 100000}:

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


This is a placeholder page for Jim Vandyken, which means this person is not currently on this site. We do suggest using the tools below to find Jim Vandyken.
You are visiting the placeholder page for Jim Vandyken. This page is here because someone used our placeholder utility to look for Jim Vandyken. We created this page automatically in hopes Jim Vandyken would find it. If you are not Jim Vandyken, but are an alumni of Schoolcraft High School, register on this site for free now.


Wisdom's not an easy thing to master. To truly accept the grace of knowledge, sometimes one must drop everything they know in favor of new paradigms..we have to let go before we can move forward. April asks us not to dig in but to settle down…to understand that we're in this for the long haul …and that evolution is anything but an easy walk in the park.
In a March 2018 post on the Mountain Astrologer, Mary Plum talks about the concept of the nodal axis…the theory that each one of us is progressing along a continuum away from something (the past) to something (our futures). But to do this work, we can't just go from flashpoint of understanding to flashpoint of understanding (with all due respect to the tesseract in a Wrinkle in Time). What is required of us is a willingness to leave what we know to go where we weren't ever planning to go. In April, a 6 month, we are learning to be down for the quest.
A six month also helps us understand life in context…we see how we are connected to what astrologer Austin Coppock referred to as 'all of life, not just how it affects us directly'. If we settle in, we realize that most things are more complex than an 'if this, then that' equation. (Think Six degrees of separation).
With a more relational perspective in hand, April asks that we accept our burden's and our neighbors in the struggle on life's path.


Else will now be on your WATCHLIST when you go to MY HISTORY on your VIEW PROFILE page.
Outside, it is a strange disease. That looks like the end of the world. But Betty and Todd love each other more than everything. Betty falls ill, like the monsters, there, outside. Her body merges with all that she touches, to begin with the bed sheets. Can Todd continue to loving a monster? He decides that yes, he just has to adapt himself. As far as becoming the other thing, quite other thing.


The Jacksboro Herald-Gazette online has a new look.
Wayne Morris turned in the petition to call a local option election for the sale of all alcoholic beverages including mixed beverages within the City of Jacksboro Friday, April 22.
The Jacksboro Fire Department is looking to replace two of its vehicles with a newer one.
Jacksboro City Council voted to increase sewer rates at its meeting Monday.