Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

This statement clarifies ethical behavior 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, namely Universitas Swadaya Gunung jati and Lembaga Penelitian.

Section A : Publication and authorship 

  1. All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two International Reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
  2. Review processes are blind peer review.
  3. The factors taken into account in the review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B : Authors’ responsibilities

  1. The author’s main obligation is to deliver accurate and complete details of the research performed. The research data should contain sufficient information on the related subject.
  2. Authors should ensure the originality of their work and that neither fraud nor fabrication is involved in their manuscript.
  3. Authors should guarantee that the article has not been published previously or is not being evaluated for publication elsewhere.
  4. Authors should ensure that their works do not contain any unlawful statements and/or any comment that may violate the law.
  5. Authors are aware of and abide by the misconduct policy.
  6. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  7. Authors must participate in the peer review process. 
  8. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  9. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  10. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  11. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  12. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  13. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C : Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. 

Section D : Editors’ responsibilities

  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 quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to 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 research material they publish 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; they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

Section E : Conflict of Interest Policy

Authors, Editors and Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following guidelines :

  1. Authors should clearly inform their source of financial support -institution, private, and/or corporate- for their research
  2. In case the author and editor of Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) have a relationship, which may lead to an unfair evaluation, another editor will be appointed instead.
  3. Reviewers should be aware of any appearance of conflict of interest when receiving a manuscript for evaluation and are required to promptly return the manuscript to the editor, informing the conflict-of-interest issue.

Section F : Research Misconduct Policy

The purpose of this policy is to prevent any misconduct related to research conducted for the journals and to suggest the fundamental principles and structural procedures in relation to research integrity deliberation required to ensure research ethics. 

The range of misconduct policy

Research misconduct suggested in this policy pertains to fraud and refers to data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and improper authorship. 

  1. "Fabrication" refers to any activity involving the creation of false information about non-existing data or findings.
  2. "Falsification" refers to the artificial manipulation of the research materials/equipment/process or random modification/deletion of data resulting in distorted research contents or research results.
  3. "Plagiarism" refers to acts of pirating others’ ideas, research contents, and research results without justifiable approvals or quotations.
  4. "Improper authorship" refers to cases where the person who has contributed to research contents or research results is scientifically and technically unqualified as an author or where someone who has not contributed to the research contents or research results scientifically and technically but has been listed as an author merely to express gratitude or courtesy
  5. Intentional acts to disturb a fraud investigation about themselves or others or acts which can be harmful to informants
  6. Unfair evaluation regarding research of others or disclosure or pirating of research ideas or research results acquired during the evaluation process.
  7. Severely aberrant acts that cannot be accepted in the community of the field of science and technology.

How does the journal address misconduct?

Editors and publishers have an ethical obligation to:

  1. Support the quality and ethics of the review process (pre-publication: weed out; prevent)
  2. Ensure the correctness of the published literature (post-publication: correct; communicate)
  3. Educate (prevent)

Editors/journals have an ethical obligation to respond and to address ethical allegations that may arise about published papers or papers in review. Systems and procedures are in place for investigating and addressing situations of misconduct, including cooperation with investigations from institutions or funding bodies.

Possible sanction

When the evidence of misconduct is confirmed, the following procedures are to be applied:

  1. Prior to publication (during review): The manuscript can be withdrawn from review
  2. Post-publication (literature correction) The journal may publish a Retraction, Note of Editorial Concern, Errata/Correction with the author or all authors’ signature or editorial of an appropriate statement about the situation. The paper can be “marked” in the literature
  3. Editors determine whether retract or correct after considering whether the case is fraud or an honest mistake. They consider the intent and then the extent to which the data is incorrect/misleading
  4. Editors may, in some cases, provide information for other editors/publishers.
  5. Editors may publish an editorial in the journal to discuss the issue generally and raise awareness of the issue.

Section G : Ethical Oversight

All submitted articles and exchanging information involving authors and editors in Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) will be considered confidential. Communications related to the publication process should not be disclosed on any website without prior consent from the editors. The names and email addresses entered in Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Regarding research involving experiments on animals, the authors should ensure that the object is fully assessed in terms of any harm to the animals. This involves a detailed examination of the particular procedures and experiments, and the numbers and types of animals used. The animals subjected to the experiment are to adhere to institutional and national guidelines. The manuscripts are required to declare that all efforts were performed to reduce animal suffering.

Section H : Intellectual Properties

Disclaimer

The viewpoint of articles published in Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) are solely the authors’ and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial boards.

Copyright

The author is responsible for acquiring permission(s) to reproduce any copyrighted figures, tables, data, or text that are being used in the submitted paper. Authors should note that text quotations of more than 250 words from a published or copyrighted work will require a grant of permission from the original publisher to reprint. The written permission letter(s) must be submitted together with the manuscript.

Publishing

This journal uses Open Journal System which is a journal management and publishing software developed, supported, and distributed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP).

Section I : Journal Management

Online: This Journal is available online and can be accessed for free.

Charges: Publication in this journal is through Article Processing Charge scheme and all published papers are available online through open access.

Section J : Post Publication - Discussion and Correction

Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) follows the guidance from COPE in regard to ethical concerns for published articles. Complaints and Appeal Editor in Chief email jshr.ugj@gmail.com is available for contact should the authors have an objection or disagreement pertaining to the publication process in Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR). Every complaint will be acknowledged and handled to resolve the issue accordingly. In addition, articles may be retracted due to both scientific and/or ethical reasons, which can be requested by the author(s) or by the Editor. Articles that are found to be seriously flawed or violated ethical guidance from COPE will be retracted in order to correct the scientific record. The retracted article will be noticed on the journal's website alongside information regarding the reason for the retraction.

Section K : Retraction

The papers published in the Journal Socio Humanities Review (JSHR) will be considered to retract 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 crossreferencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
  3. it constitutes plagiarism
  4. it reports unethical research