This statement outlines the ethical conduct expected from various participants involved in the publication process of the peer-reviewed journal, IJDASEA (International Journal of Data Science, Engineering, and Analytics). These participants include the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewers, and the publisher, UPN Veteran Jawa Timur. The principles and guidelines for ethical behavior in this statement are derived from COPE's (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal like IJDASEA International Journal of Data Science, Engineering, and Analytics plays a crucial role in establishing a reliable and respected knowledge network. It serves as a testament to the authors' high-quality work and the institutions that back them. Peer-reviewed articles uphold and exemplify the scientific method. Thus, it is imperative to establish ethical standards that all parties involved in the publishing process—the authors, journal editor, peer reviewers, publishers, and societies—should adhere to.
UPN Veteran Jawa Timur, the publisher of IJDASEA International Journal of Data Science, Engineering, and Analytics, is fully dedicated to upholding its role as a responsible guardian throughout the publishing process. We understand and acknowledge our ethical obligations and take them seriously. Our commitment is to ensure that editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising, reprints, or any other commercial revenue. Furthermore, UPN Veteran Jawa Timur and the Editorial Board are ready to facilitate communication with other journals and publishers whenever it is beneficial and essential.
The editor of IJDASEA International Journal of Data Science, Engineering, and Analytics holds the responsibility of selecting articles for publication. The decisions regarding publication are primarily driven by the validation of the submitted work and its significance to researchers and readers. The editor may consider the policies set by the journal's editorial board and is also bound by legal obligations related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. In some cases, the editor may consult with other editors or reviewers to aid in the decision-making process.
Editors are expected to evaluate manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content and quality, without any bias or consideration towards the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. This ensures a fair and objective review process that upholds the principles of equality and inclusivity in academic publishing.
The editor, along with the editorial staff, is obliged to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the details of a submitted manuscript. They should not disclose any information about the manuscript to individuals other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as deemed necessary and appropriate for the review and publication process. This commitment to confidentiality helps protect the integrity of the peer review process and ensures that sensitive information within the manuscript remains secure.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
It is expected that an editor should not utilize any unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without obtaining the explicit written consent from the author. This guideline ensures that the unpublished work remains confidential and that the author's intellectual property rights are respected. Editors should prioritize maintaining the integrity and confidentiality of the submitted manuscripts and seek proper authorization before using any unpublished information for their own research endeavors.
Duties of Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review plays a vital role in the editorial decision-making process by aiding the editor in evaluating the quality and suitability of submitted manuscripts for publication. The feedback provided by peer reviewers helps the editor assess the strengths, weaknesses, and overall merit of the manuscript. Additionally, the editorial communication between the editor and the author, which often involves conveying the feedback and recommendations of the peer reviewers, can be valuable in assisting the author in enhancing and refining their paper. This collaborative process aims to ensure that published articles meet the highest standards of quality and contribute effectively to the scientific discourse.
If a selected referee feels that they lack the necessary expertise to review the research presented in a manuscript or anticipates that they will be unable to conduct a timely review, it is their responsibility to inform the editor. They should excuse themselves from the review process in such cases. This practice ensures that the review process is carried out by knowledgeable and capable individuals who can provide a fair and informed assessment of the manuscript. By promptly notifying the editor about their limitations, referees uphold the integrity of the peer review system and help maintain the quality and efficiency of the evaluation process.
Manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents, and reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality. Reviewers must not share, show, or discuss the contents of the manuscript with anyone unauthorized, except as explicitly permitted by the editor. This confidentiality ensures the integrity of the peer review process and respects the rights of the authors, protecting their unpublished work from being disclosed or used without their permission. Reviewers play a crucial role in upholding this confidentiality and maintaining the trust of authors in the peer review system.
4. Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted in an objective manner, focusing on the content and quality of the manuscript. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate and should be avoided. Referees are expected to provide their opinions and assessments clearly, presenting supporting arguments and evidence for their viewpoints. Constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement are encouraged, as they can contribute to the enhancement of the manuscript and the overall scientific discourse. By maintaining objectivity and professionalism in their reviews, referees help ensure the integrity and fairness of the peer review process.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers have a responsibility to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors in their manuscript. If reviewers become aware of any prior observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported but not acknowledged in the manuscript, they should ensure that the authors provide the relevant citation. Additionally, if a reviewer has personal knowledge of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published paper, they should promptly bring this to the attention of the editor. This helps maintain the integrity of the scientific literature, ensures proper credit to previous work, and avoids potential issues of plagiarism or redundant publication.
6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Reviewers have a duty to maintain the confidentiality of privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process. They must not use such information for personal gain or advantage. Moreover, reviewers should not engage in the review of manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers. This ensures the integrity and impartiality of the peer review process, safeguarding against any potential biases or undue influence. By upholding these ethical standards, reviewers contribute to the credibility and fairness of the academic publishing system.
Duties of Authors
1. Reporting standards
Authors of reports on original research have a responsibility to provide an accurate and truthful account of the work conducted, along with an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data should be represented accurately and transparently within the paper. Sufficient details and references should be included to enable other researchers to replicate the study or build upon the findings. It is considered unethical and unacceptable to include fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements in a research paper. Maintaining integrity in reporting research findings is crucial for the advancement of knowledge and fostering trust within the scientific community.
2. Data Access and Retention
Authors are typically requested to submit the raw data associated with their paper for editorial review. They should also be willing to provide public access to the data whenever feasible, following the guidelines outlined in the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases. Even if public access is not immediately feasible, authors should be prepared to retain the data for a reasonable period of time after publication. This practice promotes transparency, reproducibility, and allows other researchers to validate and build upon the findings presented in the paper. By adhering to these guidelines, authors contribute to the integrity and advancement of scientific research.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Authors have the responsibility to ensure that their work is entirely original and that they appropriately attribute any work or words borrowed from others. If authors have utilized the work or words of others, it is crucial to provide proper citations or quotations to give credit to the original sources. Plagiarism, which involves presenting someone else's work or ideas as one's own without acknowledgment, is considered unethical and unacceptable. By accurately citing and referencing external sources, authors demonstrate academic integrity and respect for the intellectual contributions of others.
4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
In general, it is considered unethical and unacceptable for an author to publish manuscripts that describe the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. It is also unethical to submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
It is essential for authors to give proper acknowledgment to the work of others. This includes citing publications that have influenced and shaped the reported work.
6. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be reserved for individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study being reported. All individuals who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there are individuals who have participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author has the responsibility to ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included and that no inappropriate co-authors are listed on the paper. Additionally, the corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
When the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that possess unusual hazards in their utilization, it is crucial for the author to clearly indicate and identify these hazards within the manuscript. This ensures that readers, reviewers, and other researchers are aware of any potential risks associated with the materials or methods used in the study. Transparency in disclosing such hazards promotes safety and enables proper understanding and assessment of the research findings.
8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
In their manuscript, all authors should openly disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that could potentially influence the results or interpretation of their work. It is important to provide transparency regarding any relationships, affiliations, or financial interests that could potentially create bias or a perception of bias. Additionally, all sources of financial support received for the research project should be clearly disclosed to maintain transparency and integrity in scientific publications.
9. Fundamental errors in published works
If an author identifies a substantial error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is their responsibility to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher. The author should collaborate with the editor to retract or rectify the paper as necessary. It is crucial to prioritize the accuracy and integrity of scientific publications, and authors play a vital role in ensuring that errors are acknowledged and addressed promptly. By cooperating with the editor or publisher, authors can help maintain the credibility and reliability of the scientific literature.
Issued by editor in chief of IJDASEA International Journal of Data Science, Engineering, and Analytics.