Publication Ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS AND PUBLICATION MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES FOR JOURNAL PUBLICATION

JAM: Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen (Journal of Applied Management) published all types of research papers in science and applied management. The research method approach includes quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Our priority topics are management perspective for religious studies, gender studies, and current development.

Publication of the paper in JAM: Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen (Journal of Applied Management) that is peer-reviewed is an important cornerstone in the development of a coherent, valued and respected knowledge network. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the author's paper and the institution that publishes it. Peer-reviewed manuscripts support and embody the scientific method according to recognized standards. Therefore, it is imperative to establish benchmarks of ethical behavior that are mutually acceptable among all stakeholders involved in the publication process, including authors, journal editors, reviewers, publishers, and readers.

Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Brawijaya, in collaboration with Asosiasi Ilmuwan Manajemen Indonesia - Indonesian Management Scientist Association (AIMI) as JAM: Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen publisher takes its duties of guardianship over all publishing process, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. As part of Aliansi Pengelola Jurnal Ekonomi dan Bisnis Indonesia - Association of Economics and Business Journal Publisher (ALJEBI), JAM: Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen also collaborates in organizing seminars, workshops, and training to improve the quality of publications of all its members.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Brawijaya or Asosiasi Ilmuwan Manajemen Indonesia (AIMI), and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate and honest report of the work done and its results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the manuscript. Any review of the manuscript should be accurate, objective and comprehensive with the support of clearly identifiable perspectives. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is to provide deliberately false, inaccurate, and unsubstantiated statements.

Data access and retention

Raw research data, along with the manuscript for editorial review, may be requested. Authors should be prepared to make such data publicly available if possible. Authors should ensure the accessibility of such data to other competent professionals under any circumstances for at least 10 (ten) years after publication (it is recommended that data be stored through institutional or subject-based data repositories or other data centers), provided that participant confidentiality can be protected. Legal rights regarding proprietary data do not preclude their release. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is providing data that does not match what is reported.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure and declare (signed declaration) that the submitted manuscript is entirely original, that if they use the paper and words of others, these have been properly cited (citing the appropriate author and year) and provide appropriate source data in the bibliography (the list of sources listed should be searchable). Authors should also cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the manuscript reported in the manuscript. Passing off someone else's manuscript as one's own, copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's manuscript (without citing and providing appropriate source data in the bibliography), and claiming the results of research conducted by others are acts of plagiarism. Plagiarism can also occur in various forms that are not mentioned above. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is to unlawfully take part or all of the papers of others in all their forms.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication

Authors should not submit manuscripts that have been published in other journals for consideration, as manuscripts describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or major publication. Authors should only submit a manuscript to one journal or other form of publication. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the simultaneous submission of a manuscript (either at the same time or at different times) to more than one journal or other publication. Publication of some types of paper in more than one journal or other publication may sometimes be justified, provided that the authors and editors of the journals concerned must approve the secondary publication. The secondary publication should reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. Primary references must be cited in the secondary publication. It is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior to intentionally leave the primary publication out of the references in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the manuscript

The only people who can be listed as authors on a manuscript are those who meet the criteria for authorship and are able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made a significant contribution to the analysis/interpretation of the manuscript, acquisition of data, execution, design, or conception; (ii) have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and approved its submission for publication; and (iii) drafted the manuscript or critically revised it for important intellectual content. Any person or entity that made a substantial contribution to the manuscript reported in the manuscript (such as technical assistance, writing and editing assistance, and general support) but does not meet the authorship criteria should not be listed as an author but should be mentioned in the "Acknowledgement" section once their written permission to be named has been obtained. Corresponding authors should ensure that all co-authors who fit the authorship criteria are listed and that no co-authors who do not fit the authorship criteria are listed. Corresponding authors should also verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission for publication. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the deliberate inclusion of people who do not meet the authorship criteria.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should disclose as early as possible any conflicts of interest that might be construed to affect their results or interpretations in the manuscript (generally by submitting the disclosure at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript or with the manuscript). Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial conflicts of interest such as grants (educational or other funding), honoraria, participation in speaker's bureaus, memberships, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interests, paid expert testimony or patent licenses, arrangements and non-financial such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or material covered in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed in the "Acknowledgement" section (including grant numbers or other reference numbers if applicable). Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is for authors to omit sources of support information in the manuscript intentionally.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the paper of others and should also cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the reported manuscript, i.e., by properly citing (including the appropriate author and year) and providing appropriate source data in the bibliography (the list of sources listed should be searchable). Information obtained privately (from conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) must not be used or reported without clear, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as grant applications, unless they have obtained clear written permission from the authors of the manuscripts involved in these services. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is not properly citing and intentionally providing incorrect source data.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

Authors should clearly identify in the manuscript if the manuscript involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards in their use. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is providing inaccurate information or disguising information on the use of chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards. Authors should ensure and be able to communicate (the manuscript should contain a statement) that all procedures were performed in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the relevant institutional committee has approved the manuscript if the work involves the use of animals or humans. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experiments with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants should always be observed. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behaviors include engaging in unlawful conduct involving animals and knowingly providing information without informed consent for human participants.

Peer review

Authors are obligated to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by promptly responding to editors' requests for raw data, copyright clearance, participant consent, proof of ethics approval, and clarifications. In the case of the first decision of a revision request, authors should respond to reviewers' comments systematically, point by point, and appropriately. Authors should also promptly revise and resubmit their manuscript to the journal by the deadline. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the deliberate absence of any response after the decision information has been provided to the author.

Fundamental errors in published works

Authors should notify the journal editor or publisher immediately when they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published paper. Authors should work with the journal editor or publisher to correct the paper in error or withdraw the paper. Suppose the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published paper contains errors or significant inaccuracies. In that case, the author must immediately correct or withdraw the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the paper. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is deliberately failing to inform journal editors or publishers if authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published papers.

DUTIES OF EDITORS

Fair play and editorial independence

The editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study validity, and clarity) and relevance to the scope of the journal, without regard to the author's religious beliefs, institutional affiliation, political philosophy, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, race, or nationality. The policies of governments or other institutions outside the journal itself do not determine decisions to edit and publish. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the overall editorial content of the journal and the timing of publishing that content. It is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior to intentionally decide the evaluation results of a manuscript based on influences outside the content of the manuscript or the journal itself.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the deliberate dissemination of information about a part or all of an unpublished manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and members of the editorial board will not use unpublished or disclosed information in submitted manuscripts for their research purposes without clear written permission from the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained by the editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their benefit. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which there is a conflict of interest due to a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship/connection with any author, company, or institution associated with the manuscript; instead, they will ask another editorial board member to handle the manuscript. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the intentional use and misuse of unpublished or disclosed information in a manuscript without the written permission of the author.

Publication decisions

The Editor ensures that all manuscripts submitted and considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in their field (based on publication track record or field of science). The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which manuscripts to publish based on the results of the review process up to the final revision, the completeness of the letter of intent, the identity of correspondence authors, validation of the intended manuscript, its importance to researchers and readers, reviewers' comments, and current legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is for the editorial board to make decisions without any review process and document completeness deliberately.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Editors (together with publishers and societies) will take responsive action when ethical concerns arise regarding submitted or published manuscripts. Any reported unethical publishing actions will be investigated, even if they are discovered years after publication. Editors follow the COPE Flowchart when handling cases of alleged misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or any other record that may be relevant will be published in the journal. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the willful ignoring of any unethical publishing.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps editors in making decisions. Peer review can also help authors improve their manuscripts. Peer review is an important component of formal scientific communication and is central to the scientific endeavor. Editors share the view that all manuscripts wishing to contribute to the scientific process should be subjected to a fair review. It is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior to make any unsubstantiated comments about a manuscript intentionally.

Promptness

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that prompt review is not possible should immediately notify the editor and decline the invitation to review so that an alternative reviewer can be contacted. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the deliberate ignoring of invitations.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript accepted for review is a confidential document and should be treated accordingly. It should not be shown or discussed with anyone else unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who will only do so in exceptional circumstances). This also applies to reviewers who are invited but decline the invitation to review. It is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior to provide manuscripts to others for peer review.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations clearly formulated with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is to deliberately provide comments or arguments that are unsubstantiated or do not support improvements to the manuscript.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published manuscripts that the authors have not cited. Any statements that constitute observations, derivations, or arguments that have been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by relevant citations. A reviewer should also inform the editor of any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other manuscripts (published or unpublished) of which they are personally aware. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is to ignore and not inform the editor if the reviewer finds errors in the manuscript or similarities with other manuscripts (published or unpublished) intentionally.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Review is double-blind; however, if an invited reviewer realizes or knows to have a conflict of interest due to a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship or connection with any author, company, or institution related to the manuscript and the manuscript described therein must immediately notify the editor to declare their conflict of interest and decline the invitation to review so that an alternate reviewer can be contacted. Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted manuscript may not be used in the reviewer's research without written permission from the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer's benefit. This also applies to reviewers who are invited but decline the invitation to review. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is for reviewers who agree to peer review not to disclose if they have a conflict of interest and take advantage of privileged information and ideas obtained through peer review.

DUTIES OF THE PUBLISHER

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

Where scientific misconduct, false publication, or plagiarism is suspected or proven, the publisher will work with the editors to take all necessary actions to clarify the situation and amend the problem paper. This may include immediate publication of the error, clarification, or, in the most severe cases, retraction of the affected paper. Publishers, together with editors, should take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts where research misconduct is suspected or proven. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is for the publisher, together with the editors, to, under any circumstances, encourage research misconduct or knowingly allow it to occur.

Access to journal content

Publishers are committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scientific research and ensuring accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining digital archives. Unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior is the intentional removal of data or archives.