Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss <p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences </strong>&nbsp;is a peer-reviewed journal. <strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences</strong> is intended to publish articles concerning with the results of research on social sciences and political sciences. <strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences</strong> is published by &nbsp;<a href="https://cattleyacenter.id/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CMHC (Research &amp; Sains Center)</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="https://cattleyapublicationservices.com/hanifmedisiana/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">HM Publisher</a>. <strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences</strong> has eISSN : <a href="https://issn.brin.go.id/terbit/detail/1586996331" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2722-4252</a>. OAIJSS also has <a href="https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2722-4252#" target="_blank" rel="noopener">International ISSN 2722-4252</a>.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://issn.lipi.go.id/terbit/detail/1586996331" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><br></a><a href="https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN/2722-4252#" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><img src="/public/site/images/admin/road.png" width="211" height="70"></a></p> <p><strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences</strong> is a premier, peer-reviewed, open-access journal dedicated to advancing the frontiers of knowledge across the social and political sciences. We aim to disseminate rigorous, innovative, and impactful research that addresses contemporary societal challenges and sheds light on the complex dynamics of human interaction, governance, and social transformation. While we provide a specific focus on Indonesia as a critical locus of analysis, we enthusiastically welcome comparative studies and groundbreaking research from across the Global South and the wider global context.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align: justify;">&nbsp;</p> en-US <p><strong>Open Access Indonesia Journal of Social Sciences (OAIJSS) </strong>allow the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and&nbsp; allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions, also the owner of the commercial rights to the article&nbsp; is&nbsp; the author.</p> indonesiajournalsocialsciences@gmail.com (HM Publisher) indonesiajournalsocialsciences@gmail.com (HM Publisher) Mon, 22 Jun 2026 03:40:00 +0000 OJS 3.1.2.4 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 Digital Visibility, Algorithmic Misclassification, and Welfare Exclusion Among Informal Workers: A Mixed-Methods Study in Indonesia https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/325 <p><strong>Background: </strong>Algorithmic governance is reshaping social protection, yet the distributive consequences of automated welfare targeting in the Global South remain poorly understood. The study was grounded in street-level bureaucracy and procedural-justice theory.</p> <p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine whether digital transaction visibility and employment informality predict false-negative welfare exclusion, whether perceived algorithmic misclassification mediates these effects, and whether algorithmic procedural justice moderates them.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>An explanatory-sequential mixed-methods design combined an audit of 2,500 automated eligibility decisions with a cross-sectional survey of 640 household heads served by a public organization in Palembang, South Sumatera, Indonesia (response rate 84.2%), and phenomenological interviews with false-negative cases.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>All scales were reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.79-0.88). The audit found 72.3% aggregate accuracy and a 23.4% false-negative rate, rising to 55.1% among undocumented households. Employment informality (beta=0.28), misclassification (beta=0.31), and digital transaction visibility (beta=0.19) positively predicted exclusion, while procedural justice was protective (beta=-0.22); the model explained 52% of variance (F(9,630)=75.84, p&lt;0.001). Misclassification partially mediated the informality-exclusion link (indirect effect=0.17, 95% CI [0.12, 0.23]), procedural justice buffered it (interaction beta=-0.14, p=0.002), and non-digital informal workers had 4.27 times higher exclusion odds (95% CI [2.98, 6.12]). Interviews showed that gross e-wallet throughput was misread as income and frontline discretion collapsed into a computer-says-no bureaucracy.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Algorithmic unfairness in Indonesia reflects parameterization bias against informal livelihoods. Welfare systems should restore conditional human-in-the-loop discretion and accessible appeal mechanisms.</p> Harun Urrashid, Fitriyanti Fitriyanti Copyright (c) https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/325 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000 Synthetic Reality and the Erosion of Epistemic Trust: Deepfake Misinformation, Confirmation Bias, and Democratic Cynicism Among Indonesian Voters https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/326 <p><strong>Background: </strong>Synthetic media generated by artificial intelligence (deepfakes) threatens democratic consolidation, yet most evidence is Western and video-centred and rarely models how such media shapes citizens' political attitudes.</p> <p><strong>Objective: </strong>Grounded in epistemic-trust theory, motivated-reasoning theory, and the Liar's Dividend thesis, this study examined how the illusion of authenticity, confirmation-bias acceleration, and perception of the Liar's Dividend relate to democratic cynicism among Indonesian voters, and whether confirmation bias mediates and synthetic-media literacy moderates these relationships.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nested mixed-methods design combined computational extraction of 4,200 synthetic-media items (detector F1 = 0.92), a cross-sectional survey of 3,000 adults recruited by proportional random sampling across three urban centres in Indonesia, and digital ethnography with 50 key informants.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>The novel Epistemic Trust Erosion Scale demonstrated strong reliability (total alpha = 0.893; subscales 0.77 to 0.85) and sampling adequacy (KMO = 0.93). Cloned-audio deepfakes were trusted by 76.2% of respondents but consciously detected by only 11.5%, inverting the global assumption of video primacy. Illusion of authenticity (beta = 0.256), confirmation bias (beta = 0.269), and Liar's Dividend perception (beta = 0.212) each predicted democratic cynicism (all p &lt; 0.001), explaining 33.0% of its variance (F(3, 2996) = 492.57, p &lt; 0.001, f-squared = 0.493). Confirmation bias partially mediated the authenticity-cynicism pathway (indirect effect = 0.153, 95% CI [0.135, 0.172]). Synthetic-media literacy lowered cynicism but did not buffer the pathway.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings extend deepfake scholarship to oral, messaging-centred Global-South publics and inform electoral-integrity policy.</p> Yuniarti Maretha Pasaribu, Aaliyah El-Hussaini Copyright (c) https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/326 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000 The Algorithmic Sanctuary: Social-Interaction Burnout, Loneliness, and Emotional Attachment to AI Companions Among Young Adults in Indonesia https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/327 <p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-pandemic digital life has produced a new affective phenomenon: large-language-model “AI companions” that invite two-way parasocial relationships. Counter-intuitively, the most intense users in urban Indonesia appear to be not the physically isolated but socially active young adults experiencing interaction burnout, who treat AI as a refuge from the judgment costs of a collectivist culture. Yet no integrated model has tested why relational strain translates into machine attachment in a Global-South setting.</p> <p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine whether social-interaction burnout and subjective loneliness predict emotional attachment to AI companions, whether AI parasocial interaction mediates the burnout-attachment path, and whether collectivist judgment apprehension moderates the loneliness-attachment link.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>Drawing on Parasocial Interaction Theory, the Computers-Are-Social-Actors paradigm, and emotional-labor theory, this cross-sectional survey of 1,200 young adults recruited through a public organization in Palembang, South Sumatera, Indonesia, measured social-interaction burnout, subjective loneliness, collectivist judgment apprehension, AI parasocial interaction, and emotional attachment to AI using validated Likert scales analysed with reliability, correlation, multiple regression, bootstrap mediation, and moderation.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>All scales were reliable (α = 0.84–0.91; KMO = 0.96). The model explained 48% of variance in attachment (adjusted R² = 0.486, F = 284, p &lt; 0.001). Parasocial interaction (β = 0.318), loneliness (β = 0.254), and burnout (β = 0.238) were the strongest predictors (all p &lt; 0.001). Parasocial interaction partially mediated the burnout–attachment path (indirect = 0.160, 95% CI [0.132, 0.191]), and judgment apprehension moderated the loneliness–attachment link (β = 0.127, p &lt; 0.001).</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings introduce the “Algorithmic Sanctuary” account of AI companionship and inform digital-wellbeing policy in collectivist societies.</p> Ni Made Nova Indriani, Immanuel Simbolon, Sophia Lucille Rodriguez Copyright (c) https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/327 Mon, 22 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000 Institutional Publication Pressure and Perceived Epistemic Injustice: Mediating Roles of Cost Privatization and Research Cannibalization in Indonesia https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/328 <p><strong>Background: </strong>The transition of scholarly publishing from a subscription model to an article-processing-charge (APC) model has reorganized the political economy of knowledge production, yet researcher-level perceptions of its fairness remain under-measured in the Global South.</p> <p><strong>Objective: </strong>Drawing on academic-capitalism and epistemic-injustice theory, this study examined whether institutional publication pressure predicts perceived epistemic injustice, and whether publication-cost privatization and research cannibalization mediate that relationship, among academics at a public organization in Palembang, South Sumatera, Indonesia.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was administered to 312 academics using validated multi-item Likert scales. Reliability, a correlation matrix, multiple regression, parallel mediation with 5,000-sample bootstrap intervals, moderation, Harman’s single-factor test, and variance inflation factors were computed.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>All constructs were reliable (Cronbach’s α = 0.78–0.83). Institutional publication pressure (β = 0.219, 95% CI [0.116, 0.321], p &lt; 0.001), publication-cost privatization (β = 0.298, 95% CI [0.201, 0.396], p &lt; 0.001), and research cannibalization (β = 0.293, 95% CI [0.196, 0.390], p &lt; 0.001) each independently predicted perceived epistemic injustice, explaining 34.6% of its variance (F = 54.38, p &lt; 0.001). Both mediators carried significant indirect effects (via privatization 0.111, 95% CI [0.068, 0.163]; via cannibalization 0.105, 95% CI [0.064, 0.151]), indicating partial parallel mediation. Perceived grant availability moderated the pressure-to-privatization path (interaction β = −0.145, p = 0.006). Common method bias was not serious (Harman’s single factor = 33.3%).</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings formalize the “illusion of inclusivity” as a measurable perception and suggest that publication mandates unaccompanied by adequate funding generate perceived epistemic injustice in Indonesian public institutions.</p> Ahmad Erza, Dais Susilo, Gladys Putri Copyright (c) https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/328 Tue, 23 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000 From Eco-Anxiety to Climate Activism: The Moderating Role of Collective Efficacy Among Generation Z in Indonesia https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/329 <p><strong>Background: </strong>Escalating environmental hazards across Indonesia have transformed the climate crisis into a collective mental-health and sociological concern, yet whether ecological anxiety paralyses or mobilises young people remains contested, and Global South evidence is scarce.</p> <p><strong>Objective: </strong>Drawing on the Social Identity Model of Collective Action integrated with collective-efficacy theory, this study examined whether collective efficacy moderates the eco-anxiety to climate activism relationship and whether catalytic eco-anger mediates it.</p> <p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional survey was administered to 1,500 Generation Z respondents aged 16 to 24 years recruited through public organizations in Palembang, South Sumatera, Indonesia, using validated multi-item five-point Likert scales. Analyses comprised reliability and confirmatory measurement modelling, a correlation matrix, hierarchical moderated regression with simple-slope decomposition, bootstrapped mediation, and diagnostics for common-method bias, multicollinearity, and clustering.</p> <p><strong>Results: </strong>All constructs were reliable (Cronbach's alpha 0.84-0.88; McDonald's omega 0.84-0.87; composite reliability 0.84-0.87; average variance extracted 0.63-0.65) and discriminant validity was supported (heterotrait-monotrait ratios &lt;=0.62). Common-method bias was not a threat (Harman first factor 36.96%). Collective efficacy positively predicted activism (beta = 0.39, 95% CI [0.35, 0.43], p &lt; 0.001) and significantly moderated the eco-anxiety to activism path (interaction beta = 0.57, 95% CI [0.53, 0.60], p &lt; 0.001; Delta-R2 = 0.32; f2 = 0.55). Simple slopes showed a crossover: eco-anxiety was associated with lower activism at low efficacy (-0.56) but higher activism at high efficacy (0.57). Catalytic eco-anger competitively mediated the association (indirect = 0.33, 95% CI [0.29, 0.38]) against a negative direct effect (-0.24).</p> <p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Collective efficacy conditions whether climate distress becomes organised activism, extending collective-action theory to the Global South and informing Indonesian youth and climate policy.</p> Jasmila Tanjung, Sarah Armalia, Zahra Amir Copyright (c) https://journalsocialsciences.com/index.php/oaijss/article/view/329 Tue, 23 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000