Publication Ethics

The statement of the code of ethics for scientific publications is a statement of the code of ethics for all parties involved in the publication process of scientific journals, including: Manager, Editor, Reviewer, and Author / Author. This statement of the code of ethics for scientific publications refers to the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications, which in essence upholds three ethical values in publications, namely:

Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in the management of publications;
Justice, namely giving authorship rights to those who are entitled as authors / writers; and
Honesty, which is free from Duplication, Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism (DF2P) in publications.

This scientific publication code of ethics guidelines is translated and adopted based on Elsevier's publication ethics policy which includes:

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS-IN-CHIEF:

Determine the name of the journal, scientific scope, periodical, and accreditation if necessary.
Determine editor membership.
Define the relationship between publishers, editors, reviewers, and other parties.
Respect confidential matters, both for contributing researchers, authors / writers, editors, and reviewers.
Apply norms and provisions regarding intellectual property rights, especially copyright.
Review journal policies and submit them to authors, editors, reviewers, and readers.
Create code code guidelines for editors and reviewers.
Publish your journal regularly.
Ensure the availability of funding sources for the sustainability of journal publishing.
Build cooperation and marketing networks.
Improve the quality of the journal.
Prepare licensing and other legality aspects.
The decision of the Editor in Chief is final based on the submitted article.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS:

Publication Decision. The editor of the Jounal of Islamic Business And Entrepreneurship (JIBE) is responsible for publishing and deciding which articles to publish from the articles received. This decision is based on the validation of the article and the contribution of the article to researchers and readers. In carrying out their duties, the Editor is guided by the policies of the editorial board and is subject to legal provisions that need to be enforced such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors can discuss with reviewers or other editors in making these decisions.
Objective Assessment. The editor evaluates a manuscript based on its intellectual content without discrimination in religion, ethnicity, ethnicity, gender, nation, and others.
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about the manuscript that has been received to anyone, other than the author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, and the editorial board.
Conflict of Interest. Article material submitted to the Jounal of Islamic Business And Entrepreneurship (JIBE) and not yet published may not be used for the editor's personal research without the author's written permission. Information or ideas obtained through blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The editor must refuse to review the manuscript if the editor has a conflict of interest, which is caused by a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution related to the manuscript.
Cooperation in Investigations. Editors must take responsive steps if there are complaints related to ethics in manuscripts that have been received or in articles that have been published. The editor can contact the author of the manuscript and give consideration to the complaint. Editors can also communicate further to related institutions or research institutions. Once the complaint has been resolved, matters such as publication of corrections, withdrawals, statements of concern, or other notes, should be considered.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWERS:

Contribution to Editor's Decision. Blind peer review by reviewers helps editors in making decisions and can assist writers in improving their writing through editorial communication between reviewers and writers. Peer review is an important component of formal scholarly communication and scientific approach.
If the assigned reviewer feels that he does not have the qualifications to review a manuscript or knows that it is impossible to conduct a review in a timely manner, the assigned reviewer must immediately notify the editor.
Any manuscript that has been accepted for review should be treated as a confidential document. The manuscript should not be shown to or discussed with others unless it has been authorized by the editor.
The review must be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The reviewer must express his views clearly accompanied by supporting arguments.
Completeness and Authenticity of References. Reviewers should identify published works that have not been cited by the author. A statement of previously published observations or arguments should be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must notify the editor of substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript being reviewed and other published writings, according to the reviewer's knowledge.
Conflict of Interest. Unpublished article material may not be used in the reviewer's personal research without including written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The reviewer must refuse to review the manuscript if the reviewer has a conflict of interest, which is caused by a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution related to the work.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS:

Writing Standards. The author must present an accurate paper/article on the research conducted and present an objective discussion of the significance of the research. Research data should be accurately presented in the article. An article must be detailed enough with sufficient references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraud or inaccurate presentation of papers is unethical and unacceptable behavior.
Access Research Data. Authors may be required to provide raw data on the paper to be reviewed and must be able to provide public access to such data where possible, and must be able to retain such data for a reasonable period of time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and is unacceptable. The author must ensure that all work presented is original work, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others, then the author must present quotations appropriately. There are various forms of plagiarism, such as acknowledging other people's writings to be their own, copying or rewriting substantial parts of other people's work without mentioning the source, and claiming the results of research conducted by others. Self-Plagiarism or bibs plagiarism is one form of plagiarism. Oto plagiarism is quoting results or sentences from one's own work that has been published without mentioning the source.
Terms of Submission of Writings. Authors may not publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and unacceptable.
Inclusion of Reference Sources. Proper recognition of the work of others should always be done. The author must mention publications that are influential in the preparation of his work. Information obtained personally, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, may not be used or reported without the written permission of the source of such information.
Authorship An author is a person who has contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the writing in the article. All parties who have made significant contributions are listed as co-authors. Correspondence authors must ensure that all co-authors have been included in the manuscript, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the work and have approved the submission of the manuscript for publication.
Human Hazards and Subjects. If the manuscript involves procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify those things in the manuscript. If the manuscript involves a human subject, the author must ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures are carried out in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations and institutions and that committees within the institution have approved them. The author must include a statement in the manuscript that consent has been obtained for experiments with human subjects. The right to privacy of the human subject must always be observed. Consent, permission, and a statement must be obtained if the author wants to include case details or other personal information in the manuscript. Written consent should be kept by the author and a copy of the consent or proof that such consent has been obtained should be provided to the journal upon request.
Errors in Published Writings. When the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, the author is responsible for immediately notifying the journal editor, as well as working with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor obtains information from a third party that a published work contains significant errors, the author is responsible for immediately retracting or making corrections to the writing or providing evidence to the editor regarding the accuracy of the original writing.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR WEBSITE ADMINISTRATORS:

Website Administrator is the person responsible for managing the journal website. Specifically, the scope of duties of the Website Administrator is as follows: