Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

1. Ethical Framework and Publisher Responsibilities

JSE's publication ethics policies are informed by the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing developed jointly by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME.

Media Digital Publikasi Indonesia, as the publisher, supports the editorial team in maintaining ethical procedures, addressing concerns, and correcting the scholarly record.

Advertising, publication charges, reprints, sponsorship, and other commercial interests must not influence editorial decisions. The publisher supports editorial independence and cooperation with relevant journals, institutions, and research-integrity bodies when necessary.

2. Responsibilities of Editors

Publication Decisions and Fair Assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized handling editor makes publication decisions based on scholarly merit, methodological soundness, ethical acceptability, relevance to the journal, and the evidence provided through peer review.

Manuscripts must be assessed without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, ethnic origin, political beliefs, or institutional prestige. Authors' ability to pay publication charges must not affect editorial decisions.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect unpublished manuscripts, reviewer reports, and correspondence. Information is shared only with people who need it for legitimate editorial purposes or the responsible investigation of an integrity concern. Unpublished material must not be used for personal advantage.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose relevant financial, professional, institutional, or personal conflicts and recuse themselves where impartiality could be compromised. Manuscripts involving an editor, Editorial Board member, or a close associate are assigned to an independent editor. The conflicted person does not select reviewers or participate in the decision.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Expertise and Timeliness: Accept a review only when appropriately qualified and able to meet the agreed deadline. Inform the editor promptly if circumstances change.
• Objective Assessment: Provide clear, constructive, evidence-based comments. Personal attacks, discriminatory remarks, and unsupported accusations are unacceptable.
• Confidentiality: Do not disclose manuscripts or use unpublished information for personal advantage. Obtain editorial permission before involving another person in a review. Communicate with authors through the editorial office.
• Conflicts of Interest: Disclose relationships or interests that could compromise impartiality, including close collaboration, supervisory relationships, employment at an author's institution, or financial interests.
• Sources and Citations: Recommend citations only when academically relevant. Reviewers must not request unnecessary citations to increase their own or another party's citation counts.
• Integrity Concerns: Report suspected plagiarism, substantial overlap, unreliable data, or other concerns confidentially to the editor, with supporting information where available.

4. Responsibilities of Authors

Accurate Reporting

Authors must describe their work honestly and accurately, explain the methods sufficiently, and report findings and limitations fairly. Fabrication, falsification, deceptive image manipulation, and knowingly misleading statements are unacceptable.

Originality and Attribution

Manuscripts must appropriately acknowledge the ideas, wording, data, images, and other contributions of others. Quotations must be identified and cited. Reused material must have the necessary permissions where applicable.

Authors must disclose relevant overlap with their own previous work. Undisclosed text recycling, duplicate publication, and presenting previously published findings as new are unacceptable.

Concurrent Submission and Prior Dissemination

The same manuscript must not be submitted to multiple journals simultaneously. Authors must disclose related publications, manuscripts, preprints, theses, conference papers, and other prior versions that could affect editorial assessment. Relevant earlier work must be cited and the relationship to the submitted manuscript explained.

Cooperation with the Journal

Authors must respond to reasonable editorial requests for clarification or supporting documentation. If they discover a significant error before or after publication, they must promptly notify the journal and cooperate in its assessment and correction.

5. Authorship and Contributorship

Authors must have made a substantial intellectual contribution, participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for their contributions and the integrity of the work.

All qualifying contributors must be included, and people who do not qualify must not be listed as authors. Gift, guest, purchased, and ghost authorship are unacceptable. Other contributions should be acknowledged with the contributor's permission.

The corresponding author coordinates communication and confirms that all authors agree to the submission, authorship order, and final manuscript.

Requests to change authorship must include an explanation and written agreement from all affected authors. Unresolved disputes may lead to a pause in processing and referral to the relevant institution. The journal does not determine authorship entitlement where the parties cannot agree. Justified post-publication changes are documented through a correction.

6. Ethical Oversight, Consent, and Participant Protection

Research involving human participants, personal data, or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards and oversight requirements.

Authors must report approval from an appropriate ethics committee where required, including the committee name and reference number where available. Where a study is exempt from review, authors must explain the basis and provide documentation of exemption when applicable.

Authors must explain informed-consent procedures or any approved waiver. Educational research involving children or vulnerable participants requires appropriate safeguards, including parental or guardian permission and participant assent where applicable.

Participants' privacy must be protected. Identifiable information, photographs, recordings, or case details require appropriate consent for publication. Consent to participate does not automatically constitute consent to publish identifiable information.

7. Data, Materials, and Reproducibility

Authors should retain the records supporting their findings and describe methods, instruments, and analyses sufficiently to support evaluation and reproducibility.

Manuscripts should explain whether and how supporting data and materials can be accessed. Where access is restricted, the reason should be stated, such as participant privacy, consent limitations, confidentiality, or third-party rights.

Editors may request supporting information for review or investigation through appropriate confidential arrangements. Authors must not disclose identifiable or restricted data without the necessary authorization.

8. Funding and Competing Interests

Authors must disclose funding and other relevant support, together with any role of funders in the research or manuscript preparation. If no funding was received, this should be stated.

Authors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the work. If no relevant competing interests exist, include a statement to that effect.

Disclosures should be made at submission and updated when circumstances change. Previously undisclosed interests are assessed for their effect on the review process and reliability of the publication; action may include independent reassessment or a published notice where warranted.

9. Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools

AI tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot approve a manuscript, accept accountability, or assume responsibility for its content.

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI in research or manuscript preparation beyond routine language correction, editing, and formatting. Describe the tool and its purpose in the relevant manuscript section. Authors remain responsible for checking accuracy, originality, references, and permissions.

Generated output must not be presented as genuine observed data or used to fabricate evidence. Generative AI must not be cited as an authoritative source in place of verifiable scholarly evidence.

Reviewers and editors must not use generative AI to generate manuscript assessments or editorial decisions. Confidential manuscripts must not be uploaded to external tools without appropriate authorization and safeguards. Automated screening results require human evaluation and do not independently establish misconduct.

10. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

Concerns may be raised before or after publication by authors, reviewers, readers, or other parties. Evidence-based concerns are assessed regardless of whether the reporting person identifies themselves.

1. An editor without a conflict of interest examines the concern and available evidence.
2. The authors are given an opportunity to respond and provide relevant documentation.
3. Processing may be paused while material concerns are assessed. Relevant institutions, funders, or other journals may be contacted where appropriate.
4. The journal determines the editorial action needed to protect the scholarly record and communicates its decision to the relevant parties.

The journal distinguishes honest error from deliberate misconduct and considers the evidence and seriousness of each case. Similarity scores or automated flags alone are not sufficient grounds for a finding of misconduct. Information is shared only as necessary for responsible assessment and investigation.

11. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Authors and readers should report material errors or concerns promptly. The journal assesses whether a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is needed.

• Corrections: Used to address errors where the article's main findings remain reliable.
• Expressions of Concern: May alert readers to serious unresolved concerns while an assessment or investigation continues.
• Retractions: Considered when findings are unreliable or when serious ethical or publication-integrity problems warrant withdrawal of confidence in the article.

Notices identify the affected article, explain the reasons, and are linked to it. Retracted articles normally remain available with clear retraction markings to preserve the scholarly record. Removal is reserved for exceptional circumstances requiring separate justification.

Retraction is intended to correct the literature rather than punish authors. The responsible independent editor may take action even when authors disagree.

12. Complaints, Appeals, and Post-Publication Discussion

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by identifying specific scientific, factual, or procedural concerns and providing supporting information. Complaints about editorial conduct or journal procedures are considered separately from scientific appeals.

An editor or publisher representative without a conflict of interest assesses the complaint or appeal. A person whose conduct is the subject of a complaint does not determine its outcome. Additional independent advice may be obtained, and the outcome is communicated with an explanation.

Readers may submit reasoned post-publication critiques to the editorial office. Relevant concerns are evaluated, authors may be invited to respond, and a clarification or notice is published where appropriate.

Send concerns, complaints, and appeals to jse@mediadigitalpublikasi.com . Include the manuscript ID or article DOI, a clear explanation, and supporting evidence.

Related Journal Policies