Publication Ethics

To maintain the quality of manuscripts and avoid publishing violations in the publishing process, the editorial board establishes the ethics of scientific publications. The ethical rules in this publication apply to authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and journal managers. The ethics of the publication refer to the provisions of the ethics of scientific publications by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).


Author Ethics

  1. Reporting. Authors must provide information about the process and results of their works to the editors honestly, clearly, and thoroughly, and still keep their work data well and safely.
  2. Originality and plagiarism. The author must ensure that the manuscript submitted to the editor is original, written by him/herself, sourced from his/her ideas, and not to copy the writings or ideas of others. Authors are strictly prohibited from naming the reference sources cited to the names of others.
  3. Repeated publication. The author must inform that the manuscript sent/submitted to the journal is a manuscript that has never been sent/submitted to other publishers. If redundancy is found in sending the manuscript to another publisher, the editor will reject the manuscript posted by the author.
  4. Author status.  The author must inform the editor that the author has competencies or qualifications in certain areas of expertise in accordance with the field of publication science.
  5. Correspondent author. The author who submits the manuscript to journal acts as the corresponding author who represents him/herself or the author team in terms of publication process correspondence with the editor and journal manager. Editors and journal manager only deal with a correspondent author of each article who is responsible for its content.
  6. Error writing the manuscript. Error writing the manuscript. The author must immediately inform the editor if found errors in writing the script, both the results of the review and edit. Writing errors include writing the name, affiliation, quotations, content, and other writings that can reduce the meaning and consequences of the manuscript. If that happens, the corresponding author must immediately propose a correction in the paper.
  7. Disclosure of conflicts of interest. The author must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the manuscript can be processed smoothly and safely.

 

Editor's Ethics

  1. Decision of publication. Editors must ensure that the review process is comprehensive, transparent, objective, fair and wise. These are the basis for the editor in making decisions on a text, rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as the manuscript selection team.
  2. Publication information. Editors must ensure that the writing guidelines for authors and other interested parties can be accessed and read clearly, both in print and electronic versions.
  3. Distribution of peer-review manuscript. The editor must ensure that the review and material of the paper are reviewed, as well as the approval and clear review process of the manuscript.
  4. Objectivity and neutrality. The editor must be objective, neutral, and honest in editing the text, without distinguishing the business, ethnicity, religion, race, ethnicity, and author's citizenship.
  5. Confidentiality. Editors must maintain all information properly, especially those related to the privacy of the author and the distribution of the manuscript.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest. Editors must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the process of publishing a manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

 

Reviewer Ethics

  1. Objectivity and neutrality. Reviewers must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only stand for scientific truth. The process of studying the manuscript is done professionally without distinguishing the business, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.
  2. Clarity of reference sources. Reviewers must ensure that the source of references/citations of manuscripts is appropriate and credible (accountable). If errors or deviations are found in writing the reference/quote source, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor to be corrected by the author according to the reviewer's notes.
  3. Peer-review effectiveness. Reviewers must respond to manuscripts that have been sent by the editor. Reviewer must work in accordance with the time of manuscript review in two weeks. If additional time is needed to review the text, it must report immediately (confirmation) to the editorial secretariat.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest. Reviewers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the process of publishing a manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

 

Journal Manager Ethics

  1. Decision making. The manager of the journal must describe the mission and objectives of the organisation, especially those relating to policymaking and journal publishing decisions without any particular interest.
  2. Freedom. Journal managers must give reviewers and editors the freedom to create a comfortable work environment and respect the privacy of authors.
  3. Guarantees and promotions. Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyrights) and be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. The journal manager archives and maintains articles that have been published at least in electronic form. The journal manager must publish and promote the results of the publication to the public by providing guarantees of benefits in the use of the manuscript.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest. Journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the process of publishing manuscripts runs smoothly and safely.