Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

DIMENSI: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi recognizes the importance of ethical principles in academic publishing and is committed to maintaining high standards of ethical conduct. This statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, the Editor-in-Chief, the Editorial Board, peer reviewers, and the publisher.

This ethical statement is based on the principles and recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

The journal's publication ethics framework draws upon the following resources:

Elsevier: Publishing Ethics Resource Kit
COPE: Responsible Research Publication — International Standards for Authors
COPE: Code of Conduct
COPE: Responsible Research Publication — International Standards for Editors
COPE: Ethical Editing Guidelines for Editors
COPE: Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
COPE: Guidelines for Retracting Articles
COPE: Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in DIMENSI: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi is an essential contribution to the development of a coherent and respected body of scientific knowledge. It reflects the quality of the authors' work and the institutions supporting their research. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, all parties involved in scholarly publishing must adhere to established ethical standards.

Yayasan Yetti Afrida Center, as the publisher of DIMENSI: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, takes its responsibilities throughout the publishing process seriously. The publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, and other commercial revenue do not influence editorial decisions. The publisher and Editorial Board will also cooperate with other journals and publishers when necessary to uphold publication ethics and research integrity.

1. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

1.1. Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of academic merit, including significance, originality, methodological validity, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious beliefs, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.

The Editor-in-Chief has authority over the journal's editorial content and publication schedule. Editorial decisions must remain independent of external political or commercial influence.

1.2. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

1.3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and Editorial Board members must not use unpublished information disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the authors' explicit written consent. Confidential information and ideas obtained during editorial handling must not be used for personal advantage.

Editors must withdraw from handling manuscripts when conflicts of interest arise from competitive, collaborative, financial, institutional, or other relationships with authors, organizations, or institutions associated with the manuscript. In such cases, another qualified editor will be assigned.

1.4. Publication Decisions

Manuscripts considered for publication must undergo peer review by at least two qualified reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on the validity and significance of the research, reviewers' comments, relevance to the journal's scope, and applicable legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

1.5. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors, in cooperation with the publisher when appropriate, must take appropriate action when ethical concerns arise regarding submitted or published work. Allegations of publication misconduct must be investigated fairly, including cases identified after publication.

Where an investigation establishes an ethical concern, the journal may publish a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other appropriate notice in accordance with applicable publication ethics guidance.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

2.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making informed publication decisions and helps authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to provide fair, constructive, and scholarly assessments.

2.2. Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or are unable to complete the review within the required period must promptly notify the editor and decline the invitation so that an alternative reviewer can be appointed.

2.3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must not be disclosed, shared, or discussed with unauthorized persons. This requirement also applies to reviewers who decline an invitation after receiving the manuscript.

2.4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Comments should be clear, evidence-based, and supported by appropriate arguments. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.

2.5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should also notify the editor of substantial similarities or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published or unpublished work of which they are aware.

2.6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose potential conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, institutional, or other relationships with the authors or organizations associated with the manuscript. Reviewers with relevant conflicts must decline the invitation.

Unpublished material and confidential ideas obtained through peer review must not be used for a reviewer's own research or personal advantage without the authors' explicit written consent.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

3.1. Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must present an accurate account of the work performed and the results obtained, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the findings. Manuscripts must contain sufficient detail and references to allow other researchers to assess and, where appropriate, reproduce the work.

Fraudulent, fabricated, falsified, or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical research and publication practices and are unacceptable.

3.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide relevant research data for editorial assessment. Where practicable and ethically permissible, authors should make supporting data accessible to qualified researchers and retain them for a reasonable period, preferably through an appropriate institutional or subject-based repository. Data sharing must respect participant confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, and applicable legal requirements.

3.3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must submit original work and appropriately acknowledge the words, ideas, data, and findings of others through accurate citation. Plagiarism includes presenting another person's work as one's own, copying substantial material without attribution, and claiming research results produced by others.

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. Submitted manuscripts may be screened using appropriate plagiarism-detection tools.

3.4. Multiple, Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission

Authors must not submit manuscripts that have already been published or are simultaneously under consideration by another journal, unless an expressly permitted exception has been agreed upon by the relevant journals and complies with established publication ethics standards.

Any legitimate secondary publication must meet applicable ethical requirements, clearly acknowledge the primary publication, and accurately reflect the same data and interpretation where relevant.

3.5. Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research, participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for their contributions.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately, with their permission. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all eligible co-authors are included, that no inappropriate authorship is listed, and that all authors approve the final manuscript and its submission.

3.6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose financial and non-financial conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research or its interpretation. Such disclosures may include funding, employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership, patents, professional relationships, and relevant personal affiliations.

All sources of financial support must be acknowledged, including grant or funding reference numbers where applicable.

3.7. Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must properly cite publications and other sources that have influenced their research. Information obtained through private conversations, correspondence, or confidential services must not be used or reported without appropriate permission from the source.

3.8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

Authors must clearly identify unusual hazards associated with chemicals, procedures, or equipment used in their research. Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, and relevant ethical standards.

Where required, manuscripts must include statements confirming approval by the appropriate ethics committee and informed consent from human participants. Authors must protect the privacy, confidentiality, and rights of research participants.

3.9. Peer Review

Authors are expected to cooperate fully with the peer-review process and respond promptly to editorial requests for data, clarifications, ethics approval, consent documentation, and copyright permissions where applicable.

When revisions are requested, authors should address reviewers' comments systematically, explain any disagreement with specific recommendations, and submit a revised manuscript within the stated deadline.

3.10. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Authors who discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work must promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article, as appropriate.

If the journal is informed by a third party of a potentially significant error, the authors must cooperate with the investigation and provide evidence supporting the accuracy of the work or take appropriate corrective action.

4. Ethical Responsibilities of the Publisher

4.1. Handling Unethical Publishing Behavior

In cases of alleged or established research misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher will work with the editors to investigate the matter and take appropriate action. Actions may include publishing a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction, depending on the findings and severity of the case.

The publisher must take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of work involving research misconduct and must not encourage or knowingly permit unethical publishing practices.

4.2. Access to Journal Content

The publisher is committed to the long-term availability and preservation of scholarly content. The journal will take reasonable measures to maintain access to published research through appropriate digital archiving and preservation arrangements.

Section A. Publication and Authorship

All submitted manuscripts are subject to peer review by at least two qualified reviewers with relevant expertise.
The journal applies a peer-review process designed to ensure impartial and independent evaluation.
Reviewers assess the relevance, methodological soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language of submitted manuscripts.
Possible editorial decisions include acceptance, acceptance subject to revisions, or rejection.
An invitation to revise and resubmit does not guarantee eventual acceptance.
Rejected manuscripts are not automatically reconsidered unless the editor explicitly permits resubmission under the journal's procedures.
Publication decisions are subject to applicable legal and ethical requirements, including those concerning defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The same research must not be published redundantly in multiple publications without a justified and ethically permitted exception.

Section B. Authors' Responsibilities

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts represent original work.
Authors must disclose whether the manuscript has previously been published.
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to another journal.
Authors must cooperate with the peer-review process.
Authors must promptly report significant errors and cooperate in corrections or retractions.
All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the research and meet the journal's authorship criteria.
Authors must ensure that research data and results are accurately reported.
Authors must disclose relevant conflicts of interest.
Authors must acknowledge and cite all sources used in preparing the manuscript.
Authors must notify the editor of errors discovered in their published work.

Section C. Reviewers' Responsibilities

Reviewers must keep manuscript information confidential and treat it as privileged material.
Reviews must be objective and must not include personal criticism of the authors.
Reviewers must express their assessments clearly and support their comments with appropriate reasoning.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited.
Reviewers must inform the editor of substantial similarity or overlap with other work of which they are aware.
Reviewers must decline assignments when conflicts of interest could compromise their impartiality.

Section D. Editors' Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for making publication decisions within the journal's editorial policies.
Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the journal.
Editors should consider the needs of authors and readers when improving the publication.
Editors must protect the quality of published research and the integrity of the scholarly record.
Editors should publish corrections or other notices when necessary.
Editors should ensure that relevant research funding information is disclosed.
Editors must base decisions on academic merit, originality, clarity, validity, and relevance to the journal's scope.
Previous editorial decisions should not be overturned without appropriate justification.
Editors must protect reviewer confidentiality where applicable.
Editors must ensure that published research complies with relevant ethical standards.
Editors should accept a manuscript only when the evidence supports a positive publication decision.
Editors must act on credible concerns about misconduct in published or unpublished work and make reasonable efforts to resolve them.
Editors must investigate allegations fairly and must not reject manuscripts solely on unsupported suspicions.
Editors must manage conflicts of interest involving editorial staff, authors, reviewers, or Editorial Board members.