Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Our publication ethics and malpractice statement are largely based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).
Responsibilities of the Editorial Board
1. Publication Decisions
The Editorial Board is responsible for deciding which manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision to accept or reject a manuscript for publication is based on its merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the scope of the journal.
2. Fair Play
The Editorial Board and reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, nationality, or political ideology.
3. Confidentiality
The Editorial Board must ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain confidential during the review process. The editorial board and 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.
4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by editors or members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent.
5. Journal Self-Citation
An editor must not engage in any practice that obliges authors to cite the journal as an explicit or implicit condition of acceptance for publication. Any recommendation to cite articles in a manuscript must be based solely on direct relevance to the author’s work, with the aim of improving the quality of the final published research. Editors may guide authors toward relevant literature as part of the peer-review process; however, this should never include instructions to cite specific journals.
6. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations
Editors should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints are raised concerning a submitted manuscript or a published paper, in collaboration with the publisher (or relevant societies). Such measures generally include contacting the authors of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claim, but may also involve further communication with relevant institutions or research bodies. If the complaint is substantiated, this may result in the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant notice. Any reported unethical publishing behavior must be investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication.
7. Final Responsibility for Publication Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief of the journal has ultimate responsibility for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the journal’s editorial board policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions.
Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The peer-review process assists editors and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also help authors improve their manuscripts.
2. Promptness
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that timely review will not be possible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
3. Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be disclosed or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4. Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supported by reasoned arguments.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited in the manuscript. They should indicate whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by appropriate citations. Reviewers should also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published works of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper.
Duties of Authors
1. Reporting Standards
Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available where practicable. In any case, authors should ensure that such data are accessible to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centers), provided that participant confidentiality can be protected and legal rights regarding proprietary data do not preclude their release.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must submit only entirely original works and must appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in shaping the reported work must also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, ranging from passing off another’s paper as one’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
In general, manuscripts describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts that have been published elsewhere as copyrighted material should not be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by another journal must not be submitted to a different copyrighted publication.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without written permission from the author(s) of the work involved.
6. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed
Referensi
Komite Etika Publikasi (COPE). (2011, 7 Maret). Pedoman Perilaku dan Panduan Praktik Terbaik untuk Editor Jurnal. Diperoleh dari https://publicationethics.org/
