Publication Ethics

This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in Indonesian Journal of Character Education Research (IJCER) as well as allegations of research misconduct, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer,­ and the publisher (Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia).

This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors in large part, on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The relevant duties and expectations of authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal are set out below.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication:

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Indonesian Journal of Character Education Research (IJCER) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is, therefore, important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.  The journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Allegations of Research Misconduct:

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

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the Best Practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address 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 is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of 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.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. 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 important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, the journal will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions:

The editorial team of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Complaints and Appeals:

Indonesian Journal of Character Education Research (IJCER) will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to respect personal concerning the case of a complaint. The scope of complaints include anything related to the journal business process, i.e., editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline.

Fair play:

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality:

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript 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 research without the express written consent of the author.

A declaration of competing interests, also known as a Conflict of Interest Declaration, is a situation where an interest or relationship-direct or indirect-may influence the research. A competing interest declaration relates to the author having an employer or sponsor who is funding the research or has a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with another organization, or people who work with the author, that could influence the author's research. 

See the following example:

“The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article”.

“The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper”.

“The authors declare that they have no significant competing financial, professional or personal interests that might have influenced the performance or presentation of the work described in this manuscript”.

“All co-authors have seen and agree with the contents of the manuscript and there is no financial interest to report. We certify that the submission is original work and is not under review at any other publication”.

"In accordance with Institute of Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia (AECI) policy and my ethical obligations as a researcher, I report that I [have financial and/or business interests] or [am a consultant] or [receive funding] from Institute of Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia (AECI) which is a university that could be affected by the research reported in the attached paper. I have fully disclosed these interests to Institute of Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia (AECI), and I have an approved plan to manage any potential conflicts arising from the above involvement".

"This research has been approved and funded by Institute of Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia (AECI) as a Tridarma Perguruan Tinggi activity that leads to competency development and the output can be licensed to copyright or product,. I have fully disclosed these interests to Institute of Academia Edu Cendekia Indonesia (AECI), and have an approved plan to manage any potential conflicts arising from this arrangement.

Ethical Oversight:

If the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal, ethical clearance from an association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Duties of Authors:

  1. Reporting standards. Authors of reports 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. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  2. Data Access and Retention. Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism.The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  4. 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.
  5. Acknowledgment of Sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
  6. Authorship and Contributorship of the Article. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution 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 there are others who 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 on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest.All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  8. Fundamental errors in published work. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her 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.

Duties of Editors:

  1. Publication decisions. The editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making these decisions.
  2. Peer review. The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary the editor should seek additional opinions.
  3. Fair play. The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. When nominating potential editorial board members, the editor shall take account of the need for appropriate, inclusive and diverse representation.
  4. Journal metrics. The editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.
  5. The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.
  6. Declaration of Competing Interests. Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of the editor, and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such declarations in the journal.
  7. Vigilance over the Published Record: The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial), in conjunction with the publisher (or society).

Duties of Reviewers:

  • Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.
  • Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.
  • Alertness to Ethical Issues. A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
  • Standards of Objectivity & Competing Interests. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Duties of the Publisher:

  1. Guardianship of the scholarly record. These guidelines have been written with all these requirements in mind but especially recognizing that it is an important role of the publisher to support the huge efforts made by journal editors, and the often unsung volunteer work undertaken by peer reviewers, in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Although ethical codes inevitably concentrate on the infractions that sometimes occur, it is a tribute to scholarly practice that the system works so well and that problems are comparatively rare.
  2. Safeguard editorial independence. We are committed to ensuring that the potential for advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decision
  3. Collaborate to set industry best practice. We promote best practice by offering editors membership of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and providing editors with Crossref Similarity Check reports for all submissions to our editorial systems.
  4. Provide editors with technical, procedural & legal support. We support editors in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors and are prepared to provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

Educate researchers on publishing ethics. We also provide extensive education and advice on publishing ethics standards, particularly for early career researchers