Publication Ethics

 

Publication Ethics for Jurnal Rekayasa Sipil (JRS-Unand)

Jurnal Rekayasa Sipil (JRS-Unand) is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in all aspects of scholarly publishing. The journal follows the core practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure transparency, fairness, and integrity throughout the editorial process. This document outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and readers.

1. Allegations of Misconduct

Research misconduct—such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism—seriously undermines the trustworthiness of scholarly research. JRS-Unand follows COPE guidelines for handling misconduct.

  • Authors: Must ensure that their submitted work is original and free from any form of research misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification. If misconduct is identified after submission, authors must cooperate fully with investigations.
  • Reviewers: Should notify the editors if they suspect any form of misconduct during the review process, such as plagiarism or data manipulation.
  • Editors: Are responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct in a prompt and fair manner. Investigations should follow COPE's guidelines, and if necessary, corrections, retractions, or notifications to relevant institutions will be issued.
  • Readers: Can report concerns about possible misconduct in published articles, and these reports will be taken seriously and thoroughly investigated by the editorial team.

2. Authorship and Contributorship

Proper authorship ensures that those who contributed significantly to the research receive credit, and it also assigns responsibility for the content of the research.

  • Authors: Should ensure that all contributors who meet the criteria for authorship are credited, and that all authors have approved the final version of the manuscript before submission. Authorship disputes must be resolved before submission.
  • Reviewers: Should assess whether the authorship appears appropriate based on the manuscript content and the nature of the contributions.
  • Editors: Are responsible for ensuring that authorship complies with the journal's guidelines and that any disputes are handled transparently and fairly, according to COPE’s authorship criteria.
  • Readers: Should have confidence that the authorship of articles accurately reflects the contributions made to the research.

3. Complaints and Appeals

A transparent and fair procedure for handling complaints and appeals is crucial to maintaining trust in the editorial process.

  • Authors: Have the right to appeal editorial decisions if they believe the review or decision-making process was unfair or improper. Appeals should be submitted in writing with a clear rationale and supporting evidence.
  • Reviewers: Should be prepared to clarify their comments or provide additional feedback if an appeal is made regarding their review.
  • Editors: Must handle complaints and appeals transparently and fairly, following COPE’s guidelines. Editors will review all appeals thoroughly and communicate the outcome to the author in a timely manner.
  • Readers: Can raise concerns about published content or editorial practices, and the editorial board will investigate such concerns to ensure fairness and accuracy.

4. Conflicts of Interest

To ensure that research is evaluated objectively, all potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed.

  • Authors: Must disclose any conflicts of interest—whether financial, personal, or professional—that could influence the results or interpretation of their research.
  • Reviewers: Should notify the editor if they have a conflict of interest that could compromise their impartiality, and they should recuse themselves from the review process in such cases.
  • Editors: Are responsible for managing conflicts of interest among authors, reviewers, and themselves, ensuring that these do not affect the integrity of the editorial decision-making process.
  • Readers: Should be informed of any disclosed conflicts of interest to evaluate the validity and impartiality of the research.

5. Data and Reproducibility

Transparency in data and methodology ensures that research findings can be verified and reproduced by others.

  • Authors: Are responsible for ensuring that their data is accurate, complete, and presented transparently. Where appropriate, data should be made publicly available to allow others to replicate or verify the research. Authors should also disclose any limitations in their data or methodology.
  • Reviewers: Must assess whether the data and methods are presented in sufficient detail to support reproducibility and whether the findings are backed by robust data.
  • Editors: Should ensure that the manuscript provides enough detail to support reproducibility and that any relevant data sharing policies are followed.
  • Readers: Can use the data and methods provided to verify the findings or to conduct further research based on the published work.

6. Ethical Oversight

All research published in JRS-Unand must adhere to high ethical standards, particularly in relation to research involving human or animal subjects, personal data, and ethical approval.

  • Authors: Must confirm that their research complies with ethical guidelines and provide evidence of ethical approval when required. This includes ensuring informed consent and the protection of privacy where applicable.
  • Reviewers: Should evaluate whether ethical issues have been addressed adequately in the research and raise any concerns with the editor if ethical approval or consent is lacking.
  • Editors: Must verify that the research complies with ethical standards and, where necessary, request additional documentation from authors to confirm ethical approval.
  • Readers: Can trust that the research published in the journal adheres to ethical guidelines for the treatment of research subjects and data.

7. Intellectual Property

Respect for intellectual property is essential in ensuring that authors' rights are protected and that no content is published without proper attribution.

  • Authors: Retain copyright of their work and are required to publish under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) license. This allows others to use the content for non-commercial purposes with appropriate attribution.
  • Reviewers: Must respect the confidentiality and intellectual property of submitted manuscripts and refrain from using the content for their own benefit before publication.
  • Editors: Are responsible for ensuring that published articles adhere to copyright and licensing standards and that authors retain their copyright.
  • Readers: Can freely access, share, and use the content for non-commercial purposes, as long as proper attribution is given to the original authors.

8. Journal Management

Effective and transparent management of the journal is crucial for maintaining its credibility and ethical standards.

  • Authors: Can expect transparency and fairness throughout the publication process, with clear guidelines and communication from submission to publication.
  • Reviewers: Should trust that the journal’s management adheres to COPE’s core practices and ensures that the peer review process is fair and unbiased.
  • Editors: Are responsible for managing the journal’s operations ethically and transparently, ensuring that all processes adhere to COPE guidelines and best practices.
  • Readers: Can rely on the journal’s transparent management and governance to provide accurate, credible, and well-reviewed content.

9. Peer Review Process

A rigorous peer review process ensures that research is critically evaluated for quality, accuracy, and originality before publication. JRS-Unand uses a double-blind peer review system, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.

  • Authors: Should ensure that their manuscript is anonymized for the review process and engage constructively with reviewers’ feedback to improve the quality of their work.
  • Reviewers: Must provide objective, fair, and constructive feedback within the agreed time frame, maintaining the confidentiality of the manuscript and not attempting to identify the authors.
  • Editors: Are responsible for overseeing the peer review process, ensuring that reviews are unbiased and constructive, and that the identities of both authors and reviewers are protected throughout the process.
  • Readers: Benefit from the rigorous peer review process that ensures the publication of high-quality, accurate, and valuable research.

10. Post-publication Discussions and Corrections

Corrections and post-publication discussions allow for continuous scholarly dialogue and improvement of published work.

  • Authors: Are responsible for informing the journal of any significant errors in their published work and for cooperating with the editorial team in issuing corrections or retractions if necessary.
  • Reviewers: Should notify the editors if they become aware of errors in published articles after publication.
  • Editors: Must manage post-publication issues, including corrections or retractions, transparently and in line with COPE’s guidelines, to ensure the accuracy of the academic record.
  • Readers: Can engage in post-publication discussions, reporting any errors or concerns, and contributing to the academic discourse through ongoing dialogue.

These publication ethics, based on COPE's core practices, guide the operations of Jurnal Rekayasa Sipil (JRS-Unand), ensuring that the journal maintains the highest standards of scholarly integrity. All participants—authors, reviewers, editors, and readers—have a responsibility to adhere to these ethical guidelines to maintain the quality and credibility of the research published in the journal.