Publication Ethics Misconducts
Publication Ethics and Misconduct
JGB: Jurnal Guna Bhakti is a peer-reviewed journal.
This statement clarifies the ethical behavior expected of all parties involved in the publication process of this journal, as well as the procedures for handling alleged research misconduct. It applies to authors, the editor-in-chief, the editorial board, peer reviewers, and the publisher Ascendia.id, Bojonegoro, East Java, Indonesia.
This statement is based on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Publication Ethics Guidelines
The publication of articles in the peer-reviewed journal JGB: Jurnal Guna Bhakti represents an essential foundation in building a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the authors’ work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles embody and uphold the scientific method. Therefore, it is crucial to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing process: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the scholarly community.
Ascendia.id, Bojonegoro, East Java, Indonesia, as the publisher of JGB, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. The publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenues do not influence editorial decisions.
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct refers to fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, reviewing research, or reporting research results.
If authors are found to have engaged in research misconduct or serious deviation involving a published article, the Editor is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.
In cases of alleged misconduct, the Editor and Editorial Board will follow COPE’s best practice guidelines to resolve complaints and handle allegations fairly. This includes an investigation of the allegation by the Editor. Manuscripts found to contain misconduct will be rejected. If a published paper is later found to include such misconduct, a retraction will be issued and linked to the original article.
The first step involves assessing the validity of the allegation and determining whether it meets the definition of research misconduct. It also includes checking whether the complainant has any relevant conflicts of interest.
If a possible scientific misconduct or substantial research irregularity is identified, the allegation will be forwarded to the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all co-authors, is asked to provide a detailed response. Once the response is received and evaluated, further review and expert involvement (e.g., statistical reviewers) may occur.
For cases where misconduct appears unlikely, clarification or additional analyses, published as a letter to the editor or correction notice, may suffice.
Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions share a crucial responsibility to maintain the accuracy of the scholarly record. By properly addressing concerns and taking corrective action (e.g., correction, retraction, or replacement), JGB ensures the validity and integrity of published research.
Publication Decisions
The editor of JGB is responsible for deciding which articles will be published. The validation of the work and its significance to researchers and readers must always guide these decisions. Editors may be guided by the journal’s editorial policies and are constrained by legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions.
Complaints and Appeals
JGB maintains clear procedures for handling complaints against the journal, editorial staff, editorial board members, or publisher. Complaints will be referred to the relevant authority for resolution.
The scope of complaints includes all matters related to the journal’s editorial and publishing processes, such as citation manipulation, unfair editorial/review practices, or peer-review manipulation.
All complaints are handled in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Fairness
Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual content, without regard to authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions, and editorial communications with authors may help improve the quality of the manuscript.
Promptness
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published works not cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by a proper citation.
Reviewers must also inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper known to them.
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 consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper.
Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible and to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for the reproducibility of their results.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgment 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.
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 study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included, that no inappropriate co-authors are listed, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors must disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Ethical Oversight
If the research involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment with unusual hazards, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript to ensure compliance with research ethics involving animals and human subjects. Where necessary, authors should obtain appropriate legal and ethical clearance.
If the research involves confidential data or business/marketing practices, authors must justify such inclusion and ensure that data are safely secured.
Code of Ethics for Peer Reviewers
[Link]
Code of Ethics for Editors
[Link]
Code of Ethics for Publishers
[Link]
