Informasi is a peer-reviewed journal, published twice a year by Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (UNY). It is available online as open access sources as well as in print. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor-in-chief, the Editorial Board, the reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in Informasi 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 methods. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society. As the publisher of Informasi, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (UNY) takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and it recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. Informasi committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Publication Decisions
The editors of Informasi is responsible for deciding which 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 their decisions.

Plagiarism Screening

It is basically author’s duty to only submit a manuscript that is free from plagiarism and academically malpractices. The editor, however, double checks each article before its publication. The first step is to check plagiarism against offline database developed by Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (UNY) and, secondly, against as much as possible online databases.

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 editors 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 editors' own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the authors may also assist the author in improving the quality of the paper.

Promptness
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 editors and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by a proper citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors' attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the papers.

Review Process
Every manuscript submitted to Informasi is independently reviewed by at least two reviewers in the form of "double-blind review". Decision for publication, amendment, or rejection is based upon their reports/recommendation. In certain cases, the editor may submit an article for review to another, third reviewer before making a decision, if necessary.

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 behaviour and are unacceptable.

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.

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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement 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.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research. 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.

Fundamental errors in Published Works
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.

The peer review process aims to ensure that high quality manuscripts relevant to the topics of the journal are published. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below

Administrative submission evaluation
All submissions are checked by the Journal Administrator to ensure that they conform to the paper requirements outlined on the author information page of the journal website. Issues such as paper length, standard of the English language, format of diagrams, referencing style, etc. are considered. If the submission does not meet all or some of these criteria the submission will be declined, and the authors asked to resubmit after addressing the issues.

Initial Editorial evaluation
Chief Editors evaluates all submitted manuscripts. A manuscript can be rejected at this stage due to not being insufficiently original, having serious scientific flaws, having poor language, or for being outside the aims and scope of the journal. Manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria are either managed by the Chief Editor or passed to an Associate Editor to manage the peer review process.

Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will usually be informed within one month of receipt.

Double-Blind Peer Review
The Journal adopts ‘double blind’ peer reviewing. This means the reviewers remain anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the review process, and the identity of the author(s) is also unknown to the reviewers.

Selecting a Reviewer
Whenever possible, reviewers are matched to the paper according to their expertise, details of which are held on our reviewer database.

Reviewer reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

• Is original as to thought and method (including data)
• Is methodologically sound
• Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions
• Correctly and extensively references previous relevant work
• Follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially as concerns plagiarism
• Clearly adds to the knowledge and development of the field

Language correction is not part of the peer review process, but reviewers are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style to the manuscript, or to suggest whether the manuscript requires proof reading. In the final round, the handling Editor will check matters of linguistic and stylistic accuracy and may suggest or apply corrections at this point. In some cases, the manuscript may be returned to the author(s) for a full linguistic and stylistic revision.

How long does the review process take?
The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the reviewers. The typical time for the first round of the review process is approximately 6 weeks, with a maximum of three months. Should the two reviewer’s evaluations contradict one another, or a review is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion may be sought. In rare cases when it is extremely difficult to find a second suitably experienced individual to review a manuscript, and the one report received has thoroughly convinced the handling Editor, a decision to accept, reject or ask the author for revisions may be made, at the handling Editor’s discretion, on the basis of only one review. The handling Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with the reviewer recommendations, usually including the latter’s verbatim comments. As a rule, revised manuscripts are sent to the initial reviewers for checking, who may then request further revision or recommend a reject if it is felt that insufficient changes have been made to the manuscript.

The Chief Editor's decision is final
Reviewers advise the Chief Editor, who is responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.

Informasi apply Zero tolerance towards plagiarism and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified in an article that is submitted for publication in Informasi.

Definition: Plagiarism involves the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Policy: Papers must be original, unpublished, and not pending publication elsewhere. Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source.

Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and also requires identification of the source; e.g., previous publication.

All submitted papers will be checked of their similarity with Turnitin

When plagiarism is identified, the Principal Editor responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper in agreement with the following guidelines:

Similarity level

Informasi practices Zero tolerance towards plagiarism. We use iThenticate to evaluate the similarity index and then the editor decides the case of possible plagiarism (Similarity report will be provided to the author). Editorial board has passed the following actions:
1. Similarity Index above 40%: Article Rejected (due to poor citation and/or poor paraphrasing, article outright rejected, NO RESUBMISSION accepted).
2. Similarity Index (10-30%): Send to the author for improvement (provide correct citations to all places of similarity and do good paraphrasing even if the citation is provided).
3. Similarity index Less than 10%:  Accepted or citation improvement may be required (proper citations must be provided to all outsourced texts).
In cases 2 and 3: The authors should revise the article carefully, add required citations, and do good paraphrasing to outsourced text. And resubmit the article with a new iThenticate report showing NO PLAGIARISM and similarity less than 10%.

Additional information

It is understood that the authors are responsible for the contents of the papers they send because they confirm the paper's originality statement before submission and have read this plagiarism policy. If the second case of severe plagiarism by the same author(s) is identified, a decision on the measures to be enforced will be made by the Editorial board. The author(s) might be forbidden to submit further articles forever.

This policy applies also to material reproduced from another publication by the same author(s). If an author uses text or figures that have previously been published, the corresponding paragraphs or figures should be identified and the previous publication referenced. It is understood that in case of a review paper or a paper of a tutorial nature much of the material was previously published.

Authors must identify the source of previously published material and obtain permission from the copyright holder. If there is significant overlap with a manuscript submitted to another journal, the editor will be notified, and the case will be treated as severe plagiarism. Significant overlap includes identical or slightly modified figures or text covering half or more of the paper. Self-plagiarism less than half but more than one-tenth of the paper will be considered intermediate plagiarism, while plagiarism confined to the methods section will be considered minor plagiarism. Permission must be obtained to republish any previously published material, whether from conference proceedings or other publications in a different language, with the original source and copyright identified.

Authors are free to share their preprints at any time and through any platform they choose. In the event that their work is formally accepted for publication, authors are encouraged to create a link between their preprint and the formal publication using its Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Once the manuscript is accepted, authors may also update preprints on repositories like arXiv or RePEc with the finalized version of their manuscript.

To protect the privacy of patients, identifying information should not be included in any written descriptions, photographs, sonograms, CT scans, or family pedigrees unless it is essential for scientific purposes. In such cases, informed consent must be obtained from the patient, or from a parent or guardian if applicable, prior to publication. Additionally, authors should ensure that patients' names are removed from figures unless they have received explicit consent for publication. The journal adheres strictly to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines.

1. Responsibility for Consent: It is the responsibility of the authors, rather than the journal or publisher, to obtain patient consent forms before the work is published and to ensure that these forms are properly archived. These consent forms must not be submitted alongside the manuscript or sent via email to the editorial or publisher's office.
2. Consent Statement in Manuscripts: If a manuscript includes patient images where anonymity cannot be maintained or contains descriptions that may clearly indicate the identity of a patient, the manuscript must explicitly include a statement confirming that informed consent has been obtained from the patient.

These guidelines are essential to protect patient privacy, ensuring that individuals’ identities are safeguarded and that ethical standards are upheld throughout the research and publication process.