Publication Ethic

Publication and Malpractice Ethics Statement
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

Publication of an article in the Jurnal Riset Informatika (JRI) is an important building block in developing a coherent and respected knowledge network. It reflects the authors' work quality and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles aid and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is imperative to agree on expected standards of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and societies. JRI publishers are obliged to take all stages of publishing seriously and recognize ethical standards and other responsibilities. Kresnamedia Publisher, Indonesia, is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or additional commercial revenue have no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Publication decisions

JRI editors are responsible for deciding on the best and eligible articles for publication. The validity of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive the decision. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making decisions.

Fair play

Editors always evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff should not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosures and conflicts of interest

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used in the editors' research without the written consent of the authors.

a. Reviewer Duties

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with authors, can also assist authors in improving the manuscript.

Timeliness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that a prompt review is impossible should inform the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. The manuscript should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Objectivity Standard

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that the authors have not cited. Relevant citations should accompany any assertion that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported. Reviewers should also bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published manuscripts of which they are personally aware.

Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript.

b. Author Duties

Reporting standards

Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed and objectively discuss its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements constitute unethical and unacceptable behaviour.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written a wholly original piece of work, and where authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Generally, an author should publish manuscripts describing the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is unacceptable and unethical.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgement 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 contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors have seen and approved the paper's final version and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest in their manuscript that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

c. Duties of Editors

1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
4. Editors should guarantee the papers' quality and the academic record's integrity.
5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
6. Editors should have a clear picture of the research’s funding sources.
7. Editors should base their decisions on the paper’s importance, originality, clarity and relevance to the publication’s scope.
8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
10. Editors should ensure that all published research material conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions and should have proof of misconduct.
14. Editors should not allow conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

 Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, reviewing research, writing an article by authors or reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles published in scientific journals, Editors are responsible for ensuring the scientific record's accuracy and integrity.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them in resolving the complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper contains such misconduct, a retraction can be published and linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. 

Suppose scientific misconduct or other substantial research irregularities are possible. In that case, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who requested a detailed response from all co-authors. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient. 

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an essential obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary actions based on evaluating these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, REGISTER JOURNAL Journal will continue to fulfill its responsibilities, ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Retraction

The papers published in JRI were considered retracted in the publication if :

1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error)
2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication)
3. it constitutes plagiarism
4. it reports unethical research

The retraction mechanism follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf.