•  
  •  
 

Publication Ethics Statement

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Contents


Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

The editorial board of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Members of the board confer and refer to reviewer recommendations in making this decision, constrained by legal requirements related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editorial decisions are not affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, or religion of the authors.

Confidentiality, Disclosure, and Conflicts of Interest

During the review process, editors must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's, reviewer’s, or any other reader’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Readers should be informed about who has funded the research or other scholarly work and whether the funders had any role in the research and its publication and, if so, what this was.

Author Relations

Editors strive to ensure that peer review at the journal is fair, unbiased, and timely. The journal has established policies for handling submissions from editorial board members to ensure unbiased review. Author instructions provide guidance about the criteria for authorship.

Reviewer Relations

The Journal encourages reviewers to comment on ethical questions and possible misconduct raised by submissions (e.g. unethical research design, and inappropriate data manipulation), and to be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism. Reviewers’ comments should be sent to authors in their entirety unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks. Contributions of reviewers to the journal are regularly acknowledged and cease to use reviewers who consistently produce discourteous, poor quality, or late reviews.

Quality Assurance

Editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that different sections have different aims and standards. Editors should seek assurances that the research they publish has been approved by an appropriate body (e.g. research ethics committee, institutional review board) where one exists. Editors should be alert to intellectual property issues and work with their publishers to handle potential breaches of laws and conventions. Errors, inaccurate, or misleading statements must be corrected promptly and with due prominence.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

(http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf)

  • The Editors of the journal should have the full authority to reject/accept a manuscript.
  • The Editors of the journal should maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts under review or until they are published.
  • The Editor-in-Chief should take a decision on submitted manuscripts, whether to be published or not with other editors and reviewers
  • The Editors of the journal should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  • The Editors of the journal should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.
  • The Editors of the journal should maintain academic integrity and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
  • The Editors of the journal should be willing to investigate plagiarism and fraudulent data issues and willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
  • The Editors of the journal should limit themselves only to the intellectual content.
  • The Editors of the journal must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
  • Guest editors play a vital role in acquiring content and leading the review process for special issue publications.
  • Associate editors play a key role in peer-reviewed publishing, supporting the journal editor as subject experts on various topics. Associate editors oversee assigned manuscripts, moving these papers through review and revision. AEs are responsible for assessing manuscript quality, obtaining peer reviews, requesting revisions where appropriate, and making recommendations to the journal editor about the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Reviewers assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Qualification of reviewers

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider 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.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. The relevant citation should accompany references to the ideas of others. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they have personal knowledge.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

  • The Reviewers of the journal should assist the Editors in taking the decision for publishing the submitted manuscripts.
  • The Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts, which they are invited to review.
  • The Reviewers should provide comments in time that will help editors to make a decision on the submitted manuscript to be published or not.
  • The Reviewers are bound to treat the manuscript received for peer reviewing as confidential, and must not use the information obtained through peer review for personal advantage.
  • The Reviewers comments against each invited manuscript should be technical, professional and objective.
  • The Reviewers should not review the manuscripts in which they have found conflicts of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions.
  • The Reviewers should disclose and try to avoid any conflict of interest.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to raw data in connection with a paper and retain such data for at least two years after publication. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality, Plagiarism, and Concurrent Publication

Authors should ensure their work is entirely original and that any work and/or words of others have been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting essentially the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

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.

You and all of your co-authors must declare any competing interests relevant to, or which can be perceived to be relevant to the article.

  • A competing interest can occur where you (or your employer, sponsor or family/friends) have a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations, or with the people working with them which could influence the research or interpretation of the results.
  • Competing interests can be financial or non-financial in nature. To ensure transparency, you must also declare any associations which can be perceived by others as a competing interest.

Examples of financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

  1. Employment or voluntary involvement
  2. Collaborations with advocacy groups relating to the content of the article
  3. Grants from an entity paid to the author or organization
  4. Personal fees received by the author/s as honoraria, royalties, consulting fees, lecture fees, testimonies, etc
  5. Patents held or pending by the authors, their institutions or funding organizations, or licensed to an entity whether earning royalties or not
  6. Royalties being received by the authors or their institutions
  7. Stock or share ownership
  8. Benefits related to the development of products as an outcome of the work

Examples of non-financial competing interests include (but are not limited to):

  1. Receipt of drugs, equipment, or access to data by an entity that might benefit or be at an advantage financially or reputationally from the published findings.
  2. Holding a position on the boards of industry bodies or private companies that might benefit or be at an advantage financially or reputationally from the published findings.
  3. Writing assistance or administrative support from a person or organization that might benefit or be at an advantage from the published findings.
  4. Personal, political, religious, ideological, academic, and intellectual competing interests are perceived to be relevant to the published content.
  5. Involvement in legal action related to the work.

All authors of a manuscript submitted to the journal will be required to complete a competing interest declaration which will be listed in the Disclosure section at the end of the article. If an author is in doubt over whether they need to disclose a competing interest, they should consult with their institution or the journal Editor, who can guide them on the right course of action.

If there are no competing interests to declare, the following statement will be added to the article “The authors declare that they have no competing interests.”

Sponsorship of Clinical Trials

Conflicts of interest (COIs, also known as ‘competing interests’) occur when issues outside research could be reasonably perceived to affect the neutrality or objectivity of the work or its assessment. Potential conflicts of interest must be declared – whether or not they actually had an influence – to allow informed decisions. In most cases, this declaration will not stop work from being published nor will it always prevent someone from being involved in a review process.

If unsure, declare a potential interest or discuss it with the editorial office. Undeclared interests may incur sanctions. Submissions with undeclared conflicts that are later revealed may be rejected. Published articles may need to be re-assessed, have a corrigendum published, or in serious cases be retracted.

Conflicts include:

  1. Financial – funding and other payments, goods, and services received or expected by the authors relating to the subject of the work or from an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work
  2. Affiliations – being employed by, on the advisory board for, or a member of an organization with an interest in the outcome of the work
  3. Intellectual property – patents or trademarks owned by someone or their organization
  4. Personal – friends, family, relationships, and other close personal connections
  5. Academic – competitors or someone whose work is critiqued

Authorship of the Paper

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in 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. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper. 

Authors of Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian kewarganegaraan must confirm the following:

  • Submitted manuscripts must be the original work of the author(s),
  • The submitting corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the manuscript article's publication has been approved by all the other coauthors.
  • Only unpublished manuscripts should be submitted,
  • All authors have agreed to allow the corresponding author to serve as the correspondent with the editorial office, to review the edited manuscript and proof,
  • Acknowledge the sources of data used in the development of the manuscript,
  • All listed authors must have made a significant scientific contribution to the research in the manuscript and approved all its claims,
  • All errors discovered in the manuscript after submission must be swiftly communicated to the Editor,
  • All authors must know that that the submitted manuscripts under review or published with Jurnal Civics are subject to screening using Plagiarism Prevention Software. Plagiarism is a serious violation of publication ethics.

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are subjected to peer review and are expected to meet the standards of academic excellence. If approved by the editor, submissions will be considered by peer reviewers, whose identities will remain anonymous to the authors and vice versa, identities of authors will remain anonymous to the reviewers (Double-blind peer review). The decision regarding the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript is the responsibility of the editorial board and is based on the recommendations of the reviewers (peer-reviewed process).

Our Research Integrity team will occasionally seek advice outside standard peer review, for example, on submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. We may consult experts and the academic editor before deciding on appropriate actions, including but not limited to recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, assessment by additional editors, and declining to further consider a submission.

Plagiarism

This applies to data, images, words or ideas taken from any materials in electronic or print formats without sufficient attribution. This can include abstracts, seminar presentations, laboratory reports, thesis or dissertation, research proposals, computer programs, online posts, grey literature, and unpublished or published manuscripts.

The use of any such material either directly or indirectly should be properly acknowledged in all instances and the source of content must always be cited.

The journal uses plagiarism-checking to screen all submitted manuscripts and will deal with cases of plagiarism according to COPE guidelines. Any manuscript found to contain plagiarized material will not be considered for publication. 


RESEARCH ETHICS AND CONSENT

Studies in Humans, Animals, and Plants

All original research papers involving humans, animals, plants, biological material, protected or non-public datasets, collections, or sites, must include a written statement under an Ethics Approval section including the following:

  • The name of the ethics committee(s) or institutional review board(s) involved.
  • The number or ID of the ethics approval(s).
  • A statement that human participants have provided informed consent before taking part in the research.
  • Research involving animals must adhere to ethical standards concerning animal welfare. All original research papers involving animals must:
  • Follow international, national, and institutional guidelines for the humane treatment of animals.
  • Receive approval by the ethics review committee at the institution or practice at which the research was conducted and provide details on the approval process, names of the ethics committee(s) or institutional review board(s) involved, and the number or ID of the ethics approval(s) in the Ethics Approval section.
  • Provide justification for use of animals and the species selected.
  • Provide information about housing, feeding, and environmental enrichment, and steps taken to minimize suffering.
  • Provide mode of anesthesia and euthanasia.
  • Research that does not meet the above-listed requirements regarding ethical approval and animal welfare will be rejected.

Research Involving Humans

If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans. The manuscript should be in line with the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals and aim for the inclusion of representative human populations (sex, age, and ethnicity) as per those recommendations. The terms sex and gender should be used correctly.

Approval must have been obtained for all protocols from the authors’ institutional or other relevant ethics committee (Institutional Review Board, IRB) to ensure that they meet national and international guidelines. Details of this approval must be provided when submitting an article, including the institution, review board name, and permit number(s). Ethics approval must be obtained before the research is conducted; retrospective approval can usually not be obtained and it may not be possible to publish the study.

Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Research Involving Animals

All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, or the National Research Council's Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and the authors should clearly indicate in the manuscript that such guidelines have been followed. The sex of animals must be indicated, and where appropriate, the influence (or association) of sex on the results of the study.

Experiments involving vertebrates or regulated invertebrates must be carried out within the ethical guidelines provided by the authors’ institution and national or international regulations. Where applicable, a statement of ethics permission granted or animal licenses should be included. In all cases, a statement should be made to confirm that all efforts were made to ameliorate any suffering of animals, and details of how this was achieved should be provided.

Research Involving Plants

Studies on plants must be carried out within the guidelines provided by the authors’ institution and national or international regulations. Where applicable, a statement of permissions granted or licenses should be included. Authors should comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. 


PEER REVIEW POLICY

This journal uses double-blind peer-review, which means that the reviewers of the paper won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer. The idea is that everyone should get a similar and unbiased review.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Peer%20review%20guidelines.pdf)

If Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan’s Editor has invited you to review a manuscript, please consider the following items:

  • Reviewing manuscript critically but constructively and preparing detailed comments about the manuscript to help authors improve their research;
  • Reviewing multiple versions of a manuscript as necessary;
  • Providing all required information within established deadlines;
  • Making recommendations to the editor regarding the suitability of the manuscript for publication in the journal;
  • Declaring to the editor any potential conflicts of interest with respect to the authors or the content of a manuscript they are asked to review;
  • Reporting possible research misconducts;
  • Suggesting alternative reviewers in case they cannot review the manuscript for any reasons;
  • Treating the manuscript as a confidential document;
  • Not making any use of the work described in the manuscript;
  • Not communicating directly with authors, if somehow they identify the authors;
  • Not identifying themselves to authors;
  • Not passing on the assigned manuscript to another reviewer;
  • Ensuring that the manuscript is of high quality and original research;
  • Informing the editor if he/she finds the assigned manuscript is under consideration in any other publication to his/her knowledge;
  • Writing a review report in English only;
  • Authoring a commentary for publication related to the reviewed manuscript.

What should be checked while reviewing a manuscript?

  • Novelty;
  • Originality;
  • Scientific reliability;
  • A valuable contribution to science;
  • Adding new aspects to the existed field of study;
  • Ethical aspects;
  • Structure of the article submitted and its relevance to authors’ guidelines;
  • References provided to substantiate the content;
  • Grammar, punctuation, and spelling;
  • Scientific misconduct. 

ERRATA AND CORRIGENDA

Changes/Additions to Accepted Articles

All content of published articles is subject to the editorial review process, organized by and under the auspices of the editor. Should the authors wish to add to their article after acceptance, they must submit a request to the editor and the new content will be reviewed.

  • If the new material is added to the accepted article, it must be submitted for peer review as a new manuscript, referring back to the original;
  • If the new material should replace the original content of the accepted article, the editor may consider the publication of an erratum or a corrigendum.

Erratum

An erratum refers to a correction of errors introduced to the article by the publisher.

All publisher-introduced changes are highlighted to the author at the proof stage and any errors are ideally identified by the author and corrected by the publisher before final publication.

Corrigendum

A corrigendum refers to a change to their article that the author wishes to publish at any time after acceptance. Authors should contact the editor of the journal, who will determine the impact of the change and decide on the appropriate course of action.


INFORMED CONSENT POLICY

Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that an identifiable patient be shown the manuscript to be published.

Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws. We decide that patient confidentiality is better guarded by having the author archive the consent and instead providing the journal with a written statement that attests that they have received and archived written patient consent. When informed consent has been obtained, it should be indicated in the published article.

Nonessential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are de-identified, authors should provide assurance, and editors should so note, that such changes do not distort scientific meaning.

Patient identifiers will not be published in Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan, unless written informed consent is given and the content is essential for the scientific purpose and merit of the manuscript. Photographs of subjects showing any recognizable features must be accompanied by their signed release authorizing publication, as must case reports that provide enough unique identification of a person (other than name) to make recognition possible. Failure to obtain informed consent of patient prior to submission would result in manuscript rejection.