Publication Ethics

This statement of scientific publication ethics is a code of ethics for all parties involved in the publication process of a scholarly journal, namely: the Journal Manager, Editors, Peer Reviewers, and Authors. This publication ethics statement refers to the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publication, which essentially upholds three ethical values in publication, namely:

Neutrality, i.e., freedom from conflicts of interest in the management of publications;
Fairness, i.e., granting authorship rights to those who are entitled to be named as authors; and
Honesty, i.e., freedom from Duplication, Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism (DF2P) in publications.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards: 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 behaviour and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
Originality and plagiarism: authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. A manuscript should not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Previous work and relevant publications, both by other researchers and by the authors themselves, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication: authors should not, in general, submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Authors are expected not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such, and the primary publication should be referenced.
Acknowledgement of sources: authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given.
Authorship of the paper: authorship of a research publication should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting. 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. Where major contributors are listed as authors, those who have made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or publication should be listed in the acknowledgements section. Authors should also ensure that all authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and to the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: authors should clearly disclose in their manuscripts 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.
Fundamental errors in published works: when authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript, they should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper
Hazards and human or animal subjects: authors should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions: Based on the review reports of the editorial board, the editor may accept, reject, or request modifications to a manuscript. Such decisions should be guided by the validity of the manuscript and its importance to researchers and readers. The editor may be guided by the policies of the editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as are in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions. Editors should be accountable for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and to maintain the integrity of the publisher.
Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organise and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should also explain their peer review processes to authors, including indicating which sections of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should engage appropriate peer reviewers for manuscripts considered for publication by selecting persons with sufficient expertise and without conflicts of interest.
Fair Play: The editor should ensure that each manuscript received is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the gender, race, religion, or nationality of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is upholding the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is conducted as fairly and impartially as possible.
Confidentiality: The editor must ensure the confidentiality of information relating to manuscripts submitted by authors. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and author confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the research presented and for publication, where applicable.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors must not use unpublished material for their own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts/papers in which they have a conflict of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. Such information must not be shown to or discussed with anyone other than those authorised by the editor.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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. Reviewers should promptly notify the journal manager if they discover irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, become aware of substantial similarity between the submitted manuscript and a paper published in the journal or another article, or suspect that misconduct occurred during the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; however, reviewers should maintain confidentiality and should not personally investigate further unless the journal manager asks for further information or advice.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions on the specific feedback that is required, unless they have good reasons not to do so. Reviewers should provide constructive reviews and feedback that help authors improve their manuscripts. The reviewer should make clear which additional investigations are essential to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which would merely strengthen or enrich the work.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not review a manuscript in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript. In double-blind review, reviewers should notify the journal manager if the identity of the authors could potentially give rise to a conflict of interest.
Promptness: The reviewer should respond within a reasonable time frame. The reviewer should only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident that they can provide feedback within the agreed time frame, and should inform the journal manager if additional time is needed. If the reviewer feels that it is not possible to complete the review of a manuscript within the stipulated time, this should be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR THE WEBSITE ADMINISTRATOR:

The Website Administrator is the person responsible for managing the journal website. Specifically, the scope of duties of the Website Administrator is as follows: