Publication Ethics

Author Ethic

  • Reporting; the author should report the process and results of their research fairly, clearly, precisely, accurately, thoroughly, and impartially as well as save the data well. Honesty is expected in presenting any data and information listed in content and research results.
  • Originality; the author makes a statement that the paper submitted to the journal editor is original (from the author's own ideas), has never been delivered and published in any media, in any language, and not in the process of submission to another publisher. In the case of publication duplication and deception, the article is subject to be removed from this journal.
  • Clear sources; the author should mention and ensure that any reading materials used as citations and bibliography are written clearly and completely. The author is strictly forbidden to quote the writings of others without citing the original source.
  • Responsibility; the author is fully responsible for the data and research writings, in terms of methods, analysis, calculation, and details. If verification is required from editor and reviewer, the author is willing to answer it clearly, precisely and fairly.
  • Agreement; the author ensures that the names listed in the article are based on contributions of ideas and thoughts every author and have been approved by the entire team of the author. Any changes, reductions or additions of author names, should be approved by the team of the author. Any other parties contributing fully ( non-substance ) in writing this paper,  the author expresses their gratitude to the relevant parties.
  • Punctuality; The author revises and edits the manuscript punctually for the sake of discipline and regular journal publication. Otherwise, the author is ready to take the consequences, which is the delay of journal article publication.
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest; the author upholds copyright and privacy of one another to avoid conflicts of interest. In the event of a conflict of interest with other parties, the author must solve it justly and wisely.

Editor Ethic

  • Neutrality; the editor is neutral in selecting and screening the manuscript. The editor must be objective and fair to every author who submitted their written works. The editor is forbidden to be discriminative to the author in terms of gender, ethnicity, religion, race, intergroup, or nationality.
  • Reporting; The editor reports the selection and reviews scripts clearly and accurately to the author based on accuracy, completeness, and clarity of reporting of result research and its development, including editing techniques and the use of guidelines for publication and screenwriting.
  • Communicative; The editor communicates effectively and efficiently in the process of publishing the journal. Every suggestion and criticism from the author, reviewer, and journal manager should be addressed clearly, fairly and transparently.
  • Fairness; The editor distributes the manuscript to editor team members and reviewers fairly based on their respective competence.
  • Professional; The editor works professionally based on his duties and responsibilities. The editor should understand any policy related to journal publication. The editor ensures that every script has undergone the editorial process and review correctly, fairly, and objectively.
  • Responsibility; The editor takes full responsibility for the success of journal publication. Editor guarantees that every journal article published is a new paper and not a copy, and gives benefits to those reading and accessing the journals.
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest; editor upholds copyright and privacy of each other to avoid conflict of interest. Should a conflict of interest arise with other parties, an editor must solve it justly and wisely.

Reviewer Ethic

  • Neutrality; the reviewer is fair, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favor of scientific truth. The script review process is carried out professionally without distinguishing the author’s background. Reviewer is prohibited to conduct a review of papers involving himself, either directly or indirectly.
  • Professional; reviewer should be critical and professional in assessing a paper (related to his expertise), open about new things, able to keep the secret of the things being assessed, does not take personal advantage of the paper he assesses, as well as has a passion for improving written works. The reviewer has the right to refuse a script if it does not correspond to his expertise. He then can recommend it to the other more competent reviewer in accordance with the scope of the publication.
  • Quality assurance; The reviewer has a duty to assist the editor in improving the quality of paper he reviews. The reviewer analyzes papers on the substance not on grammar, punctuation, and typos. The reviewer is required to uphold the basic principles and scientific analysis in the process of reviewing a paper. The reviewer works on the principle of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritizes the benefit of the paper for the development of science, technology, and innovation; as well as understands the impact of paper on the development of science.
  • Punctuality; The reviewer reviews the manuscript and gives a response to the editor quickly, expected to be on time. If the time is not enough, the reviewer then informs the editor with a clear reason for the sake of discipline and regularity of journal publication.
  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest; reviewer upholds copyright and privacy of each other in order to avoid conflicts of interest. Should a conflict of interest arise with other parties, the reviewer must finish it justly and wisely.