Publication Ethics

This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher Universitas Negeri Padang. This statement is based on COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (see below) and the current COPE's Core Practices..

Duties of the Journal’s Board

The Journal’s Board shall:

  1. determine the name of the journal, scientific scope, scale, and accreditation;
  2. determine members of the Editorial Board;
  3. define the relationship between the publisher, editors, peer reviewers, and other parties in a contract;
  4. maintain confidential information about contributing researchers, authors, editors, and peer reviewers;
  5. apply norms and provisions regarding intellectual property rights, particularly copyright;
  6. review journal policies and submit the review to authors, editors, peer reviewers, and readers;
  7. establish code of conduct for editors and peer reviewers;
  8. publish a journal regularly;
  9. ensure the availability of funding sources for the sustainability of journal publication;
  10. build cooperation and marketing networks;
  11. prepare licensing and other legal aspects;

Duties of the Editors

The editors shall:

  1. match the needs of readers with those of authors;
  2. make efforts to improve the quality of publications over time;
  3. implement processes to ensure that published papers are of highest quality;
  4. support objective freedom of opinion;
  5. maintain the integrity of the authors and their academic track record;
  6. submit corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, and apologies where necessary;
  7. take responsibility for the style and format of the written work, while the content and statements in the written work are the responsibility of the author;
  8. actively seek opinions from authors, readers, peer reviewers, and members of the Editorial Board to improve the quality of publications;
  9. encourage an assessment of the journal if any interesting finding related to the journal’s publications is identified;
  10. support initiatives to educate researchers about the ethics of publication;
  11. assess the effect of publication policies on the authors and peer reviewers and revise the policies to enhance responsibility and minimize errors;
  12. have an open mind to new opinions or views of others that may conflict with personal opinions;
  13. not maintain personal opinion or the opinion of authors or any third party which may result in non-objective decisions;
  14. encourage authors to revise their article until it is fit for publication;

Duties of Peer Reviewers

  1. Peer reviewers shall review articles and submit the review to editors to be used as consideration for determining the eligibility of the articles for publication.
  2. Peer reviewers shall not review works that directly or indirectly involve themselves.
  3. Peer reviewers shall maintain the privacy of authors by not disseminating the results of review, including suggestions and recommendations.
  4. Peer reviewers shall encourage authors to revise their manuscript.
  5. Peer reviewers shall reassess manuscripts that have been revised according to predetermined standards.
  6. Peer reviewers shall review manuscripts in a timely manner according to scientific principles (e.g. methods of data collection, legal matters related to the author, conclusions).
  7. Peer reviewers shall identify manuscripts that have been published elsewhere to prevent double publications.
  8. Peer reviewers shall clearly indicate reasons that lead to the rejection of a manuscript.
  9. Peer reviewers shall provide constructive input to manuscripts that are accepted with revision.
  10. Before accepting or rejecting a manuscript, peer reviewers shall consider whether it is within their scope of expertise and whether they have sufficient time to review the manuscript before the deadline.
  11. The results of the review will assist the editors in deciding whether or not the manuscript is fit for publication.
  12. Peer reviewers may summarize the reviewed manuscript by providing specific comments and suggestions, including the layout and format of the writing, title, abstract, introduction, graphics, methods, statistical errors, results, discussions / conclusions, language and references. Peer reviewers shall tell the editors directly if they find any submitted manuscript suspicious
  13. In making recommendations on the results of a reviewed manuscript, peer reviewers shall explain in detail the reasons that the manuscript is accepted, rejected, or accepted with some revision.

Duties of the Authors

  1. Authors shall ensure that those stated as the author of a manuscript meet the criteria as an author.
  2. To be listed as an author of a manuscript, a person shall: (a) contribute significantly in different stages of research (planning, drafting, data collection, data analysis, and data interpretation); (b) contribute significantly to the preparation, revision and finalization of the manuscript; and (c) be responsible for the accuracy and scientific integrity of the work.
  3. The inclusion of a person's name as an author shall be discussed early to avoid disputes.
  4. Authors shall state the origin of resources (including funding) directly or indirectly.
  5. Authors shall respond to comments from peer reviewers in a professional and timely manner.
  6. Authors shall notify editors in the event that they intend to retract their manuscript.
  7. Authors shall make a statement that the manuscript submitted for publication is original, has never been published anywhere in any language, and it is not in the process of being submitted to another publisher.