Publications Ethic

PUBLICATIONS ETHIC

Arwana: Jurnal Ilmiah Program Studi Perairan is a journal that aims to be a leading peer-review platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers focused on fisheries science as well as related topics that have never been published in any language, nor are under review for publication anywhere. The following statement describes the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editorsl

Author Duties

Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate report of the original research conducted as well as a discussion of its intended meaning. Researchers must present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate manipulation of data. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate reports constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow journal submission guidelines.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written a fully original work with a maximum plagiarism score of 25%. Manuscripts should not be submitted simultaneously with more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors themselves, must be properly acknowledged and referenced. Primary literature should be cited where possible. Original words taken directly from publications by other researchers will appear in quotation marks with proper citation.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors should not generally submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. It is also expected that authors will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others should always be given.
Manuscript Authorship: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect the individual's contribution to the work and reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the reported research. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where the main contributor is listed as an author while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or publication are listed in the acknowledgment section. Authors also ensure that all authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any substantive financial conflicts or interests that might be construed to influence the outcome or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Work: If the authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, then the authors should immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: Authors should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Editor Duties

All submitted articles will be reviewed by the editors first. The authors' manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using Turnitin, Plagiarism Checker and iThenticate software. Manuscripts that have a plagiarism value of more than 25% will be immediately rejected and returned to the author.
Publication Decision: Based on the report from the editorial review board, the editor may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validity of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive the decision. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal provisions as come into force regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions. Editors must take responsibility for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
Manuscript Review: Editors should ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editors for originality. Editors should organize and use sufficient and judicious peer review. Editors should explain their peer review process in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding people with conflicts of interest.
Fair Play: The editor should ensure that every manuscript accepted by the journal is reviewed for intellectual content regardless of the sex, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and informed decisions is upholding the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publication, which makes it extremely important that this process is as fair and objective as possible.
Confidentiality: Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. The editor must critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes his/her freedom to properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: The Journal editor will not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.

Reviewer Duties

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as confidential information. They should not be displayed or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should ensure that the authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Statements that observations, derivations or arguments have been reported previously should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should inform the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, realize substantial similarities between the manuscript and concurrent submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and personally not investigate further unless the journal requests further information or advice.
Objectivity Standard: Reviews of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journals' instructions on the specific feedback required of them and, unless there is a reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their review and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear that suggested additional investigations are important to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration and that will only strengthen or extend the work.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers do not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. In the case of double-blind reviews, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) inform the journal if this knowledge poses a potential conflict of interest.
Accuracy: The reviewers should respond within a reasonable time-frame. Reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed time frame, informing the journal immediately if they require an extension. In the event that the reviewer feels it is impossible for him/her to complete the review of the manuscript within the specified time then this information should be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

Publications Ethic

terakreditasi

Menu

LANGUAGE

MENU

tempate

issn

tools

statistik