Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

This statement clarifies the ethical conduct expected of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journal, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher, Universitas Terbuka.

Section A: Publication and Authorship

All submitted manuscripts are subject to a rigorous peer review process conducted by at least two International Reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area.

The review process follows a blind peer review format.

Reviews are conducted with consideration of the manuscript's relevance, accuracy, significance, originality, readability, and language quality. Possible editorial decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection. If authors are invited to revise and resubmit a manuscript, acceptance of the revised version is not guaranteed. Rejected manuscripts will not be reconsidered for review. Acceptance of manuscripts is subject to applicable legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. No research may be included in more than one publication.

Section B: Responsibilities of Authors

  • Authors must declare that their manuscript is their own original work.
  • Authors must declare that the manuscript has not been previously published elsewhere.
  • Authors must declare that the manuscript is not currently under consideration for publication in any other venue.
  • Authors must participate in the peer review process.
  • Authors are obligated to provide retractions or corrections of errors when necessary.
  • All authors listed in the manuscript must have made a significant contribution to the research.
  • Authors must declare that all data presented in the manuscript are authentic.
  • Authors must disclose to the Editor any conflicts of interest.
  • Authors must identify all sources used in the preparation of their manuscript.
  • Authors must report any errors discovered in their published work to the Editor.

 

Section C: Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all information pertaining to the manuscript and treat it as privileged information.
  • Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism directed at the author(s).
  • Reviewers must express their views clearly and support them with well-reasoned arguments.
  • Reviewers must identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  • Reviewers must notify the Editor-in-Chief of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript.

 

Section D: Responsibilities of Editors

  • Editors hold full responsibility and authority to accept or reject manuscripts.
  • Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the publication.
  • Editors must continually consider the needs of both authors and readers when seeking to improve the publication.
  • Editors must ensure the quality of published papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  • Editors must publish errata or issue corrections as necessary.
  • Editors must have a clear understanding of the funding sources underpinning the research.
  • Editors must base their decisions solely on the significance, originality, clarity, and relevance of the manuscript to the scope of the publication.
  • Editors must not reverse their decisions or overturn the decisions of previous editors without serious and substantiated justification.
  • Editors must preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  • Editors must ensure that all published research materials comply with internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  • Editors should only accept manuscripts when sufficiently confident in their suitability for publication.
  • Editors must take action if misconduct is suspected, whether in published or unpublished manuscripts, and must make all reasonable efforts to pursue an appropriate resolution.
  • Editors must not accept manuscripts on the basis of suspicion alone; evidence of misconduct must be established before action is taken.
  • Editors must not permit conflicts of interest to exist among editorial staff, authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board.