Publication Ethics

Introduction

A 'code of conduct' that outlines the desired behavior and obligations of members of the scientific profession is needed for the publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal. Such a code of conduct attempts to optimize the advantages of science to society and the profession. The advancement of science necessitates sharing knowledge, even though this may sometimes forego any immediate personal benefit.

The publication of scientific research in journals is one of the fundamental ways Jurnal Tunas Geografi serves the geography science communities. For this purpose, editors, reviewers, authors, and publishers must maintain a high ethical standard of publishing manuscripts in the Jurnal Tunas Geografi.

Editors

Editors have the following responsibilities:

  • To decide which articles submitted to the journal should be published. Editors are accountable and responsible for everything they post.
  • Accept or reject a manuscript for publication with reference only to the manuscript's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal.
  • To acknowledge receipt of submitted manuscripts and to ensure the fair, efficient, and timely review process of submitted manuscripts.
  • To assess manuscripts for the intellectual subject matter disregarding race, gender, religious belief, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. 
  • To guarantee that submitted manuscripts are handled in personal conduct, with no details being disclosed to anyone, except for the reviewers, without the author's permission until a decision has been made as to whether the manuscript will be published.
  • Not unveil any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone, excluding the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • Not to use for their research, work reported in unpublished submitted articles.
  • To act in response to any suggestions of scientific misconduct or to convincing evidence that a published manuscript's primary substance or conclusions are mistaken, usually through consultation with the author. This may necessitate the publication of a formal withdrawal or amendment.
  • To determine rationally responsive measures when ethical objections have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper in association with the publisher (or society).

Reviewers

Reviewers should:

  • Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to conduct an appropriate evaluation and which they can assess promptly.
  • Acknowledge that peer review is a joint effort and undertake to conduct their fair share of reviewing promptly.
  • Be objective and constructive in their reviews, abstaining from being hostile and making offensive personal remarks.
  • Have a non-influenced review, neither by the author's nationality, religious nor political beliefs of the author, gender, or other characteristics of the authors, nor by commercial considerations.
  • Treat any manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  • Not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person's or organization's advantage or to disadvantage or discredit others.
  • Recognize relevant published work that has not been referred to by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be completed by pertinent reference.
  • State all possible conflicting interests, looking for recommendations from the journal if they are hesitant about whether something constitutes a relevant interest.

Authors

Authors have the following responsibilities:

  • To present a report of the research conducted ethically and responsibly.
  • To demonstrate their results truthfully without fraud, misrepresentation, or improper data manipulation.
  • If needed, provide the unprocessed data in connection with a paper for editorial review.
  • To ensure that the work they submitted is original. If the authors have used the work and words of others, this has been appropriately cited or referred to. Plagiarism in all its forms comprises unethical publishing manners and is intolerable.
  • To clearly and explicitly describe their methods so others can confirm their findings.
  • Take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
  • The authorship of research publications should precisely reveal individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting.
  • To 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.
  • Report to the journal editor or publisher if an author notices a significant inaccuracy or erroneousness in their published work. They have to collaborate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper.

Publishers

Publishers should:

  • Define the relationship between the publisher, editor, and other parties in a contract.
  • Respect privacy (for example, research participants, authors, and reviewers).
  • Defend intellectual property and copyright.
  • Promote editorial independence.
  • Work with journal editors to:
    • Regulate journal policies appropriately and aspire to meet those policies, particularly concerning editorial independence, research ethics, authorship, clearness and honesty, peer review, appeals, and complaints.
    • Inform journal policies to authors, readers, and reviewers.
    • Evaluate journal policies periodically.
    • Preserve the integrity of the academic record.
    • Support the parties in charge of investigating suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, assist in resolving these problems.
    • Issue amendments, clarifications, and retractions.
    • Publish content on a timely basis.