Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics applied by Jurnal Ilmu Keperawatan dan Kebidanan refers to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), includes Publication Ethics by Authors, Editors and Reviewers. 

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS - AUTHOR

  1. Reporting Standards. Activity reports to the public regarding activities that have been carried out must be prepared and presented accurately, discussed objectively and significantly. The underlying data must be represented accurately. The article should contain enough detail and references to allow others to replicate the activity.
  1. Originality and Plagiarism. The author must ensure that the entire content of the article that has been prepared is original scientific work that has very low similarities compared to articles written by other authors. If the author refers to the work and/or words of another author, the author must cite it with appropriate citations.
  1. Multiple Publication, Redundant, or Content Similarity. An author is not permitted to submit articles that basically describe the same activity in more than one journal or primary publication. Submission of the same article to more than one journal simultaneously is unacceptable unethical publication behavior.
  1. Source Acknowledgment. Proper acknowledgment of the work of other authors should always be given. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported.
  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Authors need to mention any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of the article they have prepared. All sources of financial support should also be mentioned.
  1. Fundamental errors in published work. When the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted scientific work, the author needs to immediately inform the editor-in-chief or publisher and work together with the editor-in-chief to retract or correct the article.

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS - EDITOR

  1. Fair Treatment. The editorial board evaluates articles submitted by authors without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, belief/religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
  1. Confidentiality. The editorial board is not permitted to disclose any information about articles submitted by the author to anyone other than Reviewer (reviewers), Reviewer potential (potential reviewers), editorial advisor (advisory board), and relevant related parties.
  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Material that is not permitted to be published by the editorial board is not permitted to be used for the purposes of the editorial board itself without written approval from the author of the article.
  1. Editorial Board Criteria. It is preferred that the Editorial Board, both local and international, have a Scopus ID or have one articles published in reputable international journals. The editorial board can help Reviewer to provide input on the article in addition to the results of the review by Reviewer Alone.
  1. Publication Decisions. The editor-in-chief is responsible for deciding which articles will be published by taking into account the interests of the author and readers. The editor-in-chief may request input from the editorial board regarding applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief can negotiate with the editorial board or Reviewer in making this decision.
  1. Article Review. The editor-in-chief must ensure that each article has been checked for originality. The editorial board determines Reviewer fairly and wisely. The editorial board explains the article review process (peer review) which is informed to the author through the article review mechanism. The editorial board determines Reviewer the right one for each article by selecting Reviewer who has appropriate competencies and has no conflict of interest.

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS – REVIEWER

  1. Contribution to Editorial Board Decisions. To reviewer assist the editorial board in making decisions, including helping authors to improve papers.
  1. Criteria Reviewer. Reviewer, both local and international, must have articles that have been published in reputable international journals. Reviewer must have published an article with the same theme as the article to be reviewed, or Reviewer have a community engagement program with the same theme.
  1. Objectivity Standards. Reviewer must work objectively. Personal criticism of the author is not permitted. Reviewer must provide clear input with supporting arguments.
  1. Confidentiality. Articles accepted for review are treated as confidential documents. Reviewer must not show or discuss the manuscript with other people unless permitted by the editorial board.
  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewer may not review articles, which have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any author, company, or institution connected to the article.
  1. Source Acknowledgment. Reviewer must identify library sources that have not been cited by the author. Every statement of observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported must be accompanied by a quote from the relevant literature source. Reviewer may call to the editorial board's attention any substantive similarities or overlaps between the article under review and other articles that have been published.
  1. Review Time Period. Reviewer expected to review the article within 2 weeks to 1 month (maximum). Lots of it Reviewer each article minimum 1 Reviewer and maximum 2 Reviewer.