Publication Ethics
Jurnal Bina Akuntansi (JBA) is a peer-reviewed and open-access journal published by the LPPM STIE Wiyatamandala. The editorial team is committed to fulfilling and maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, namely the author, editor, editorial board, reviewer, and publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical Principles
Our journal is committed to adhering to the ethical principles based on Core Practices issued by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as follows:
1. Allegations of misconduct
Our journal welcomes any valid allegation made against authors, reviewers and editors. The handling of allegations of misconduct at our journal can be divided into two situations. First is an allegation against the author and second is an allegation against a reviewer or editor. If an author has been alleged of potential misconduct such as plagiarism or its article has already been published elsewhere hence independent investigation will be conducted towards the allegation. Shall the allegation be found to be valid; the alleged author will be blacklisted and his/her article will be withdrawn from our publication. The alleged author will also be required to provide a formally-written statement of apology which will be posted on our announcement platform on our website.
Similarly, in the case of an allegation against a reviewer or editor, an independent investigation will also be performed accordingly. Shall the allegation against the reviewer and editor be found to be valid, the said reviewer and editor will no longer be participating in any of our journal activities.
2. Authorship and contributorship
Authors are responsible to provide original research, which has not been submitted or published elsewhere. Authors are also responsible for providing accurate and detailed data when requested. To ensure originality, the authors need to check the originality of the article using a plagiarism checker before the article submission. The authors have to fill out and submit the copyright transfer form available on the website when submitting their manuscripts. When reproducing data from other sources, proper citation and permission are required.
3. Complaints and appeals
Our journal is committed to treating any complaints and appeals fairly, promptly and independently. For instance, reasonable complaints against the reviewer will be handled by the chief editor and any complaint against the chief editor will be handled by the publisher.
4. Conflicts of interest / Competing interests
A conflict of interest is possible to occur when the author has a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations, or with the people working with them, that could influence their research. Therefore, authors are required to provide full disclosure about any potential conflicts of interest in a cover letter. Detailed financial sources supporting the work should also be fully acknowledged. The editor may decide not to publish your article based on any declared conflict. The conflict of interest can be declared on your cover letter or the manuscript submission form in the journal’s online peer-review system.
The following is a sample of disclosure about conflict of interest by the author:
In accordance with the ethical policy of JBA and my ethical obligation as a researcher, I am reporting that I [have financial and/or business interests in/am a consultant to/receive funding from] (delete as appropriate) a company that may influence my research.
The editorial team of JBA may subsequently decide whether to publish or not to publish the article based on the above disclosure. If there is no disclosure by the author, JBA will publish the following statement: “No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors
5. Data and reproducibility
Authors are responsible to provide accurate and detailed data when they are requested.
6. Ethical oversight
Authors are required to maintain the confidentiality of data published in their papers. The journal also upholds the utmost importance of data confidentiality and ethical conduct of research subjects either human, business, or marketing practices.
7. Intellectual property
JBA is an open-access journal. This is an open-access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author.
8. Journal management
JBA is operated using Open Journal System (OJS) platform. JDBA editorial team is headed by one Chief Editor assisted by one managing editors and a team of associate editors with the advice and supervision of an independent Editorial Advisory Board coming from Indonesia and several other countries. To ensure efficient journal management and its continuous improvement, members of the JBA editorial team occasionally attend relevant training and programs held about journal management.
9. Peer review processes
All submitted articles will be reviewed in the double-blind system for peer review; both reviewers' and authors’ identities remain anonymous. The submitted manuscript will be reviewed by at least two experts: one editorial member and one external reviewer. The review process may take two to four weeks.
10. Post-publication discussions and corrections
Our journal allows debate post-publication through letters to the editor and mechanisms for correcting, revising or retracting articles after publication is through an announcement feature on our website.
Duties of the Editorial Team
The responsibilities of the editorial team are as follows:
Chief editors and managing editors have full responsibility and authority to accept or reject an article. Articles submitted by the authors to JBA are distributed by the editor-in-chief or managing editors to the editor on board or external reviewers. JBA relies on the double-blind peer-review process to uphold the quality and validity of individual articles and the journals that publish them.
In a decision to publish an article, editors should be objective and fair when conducting their duties without making any discrimination on gender, ethnicity, religion, political view or geographical origin of the authors. The editor has the right to do an editorial revision of the accepted manuscript. Editors should also accept articles based on the quality of an article on academic merit. Responsibilities of reviewers are requested to assist in improving the quality of an article within a scheduled period of time set by the editor-in-chief or managing editor. Reviewers contribute to the decision-making process of the article. If reviewers find any published or submitted content similar to an article that is under review, the editor has to be informed. Reviewers should have no conflict of interest concerning the research, the authors and/or the research funders. Any confidentiality of the information supplied by the editor or author should be maintained.
Fair play and editorial independence
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively based on their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and their relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
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 advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Publication decisions
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication to undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is essential to formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific endeavour. AP-SMART shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
Promptness
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data centre), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication
Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.
The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, and translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Authorship of the manuscript
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, and general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from the conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Peer review
Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consent and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary", authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
Fundamental errors in published works
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they must promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then the authors must promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.
Duties of the Publisher
Handling of unethical publishing behaviour
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Access to journal content
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.
1.png)
