Publication Ethics

JEBI PUBLICATION ETHICAL STANDARDS 2024

Journal Economic Business Innovation (JEBI) operates as a peer-reviewed journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior expected from all parties involved in the publication process of articles in this journal, including authors, editors-in-chief, Editorial Board, peer-reviewers, and the publisher (PT. Inovasi Analisis Data - IAD). This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

PUBLICATION ETHICS GUIDELINES

The publication of an article in JEBI, reviewed by peers, is a crucial foundation in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. It serves as a direct reflection of the quality of the authors' work and the supporting institutions. Peer-reviewed articles uphold and embody scientific methods. Therefore, it is important to agree on ethical standards of behavior expected from all parties involved in the publication process: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the community.

As the publisher of Journal Economic Business Innovation (JEBI), we take our stewardship responsibilities at every stage of publication very seriously, acknowledging our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting, or any other commercial revenue does not impact or influence editorial decisions. Furthermore, the publisher and Editorial Board will facilitate communication with other journals and/or publishers if deemed useful and necessary.

STAND UP TO RESEARCH ABUSE

In addressing research misconduct, which encompasses fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in the conduct, reporting, or review of research and the writing of articles by authors, or in the reporting of research results, Journal Economic Business Innovation (JEBI) holds itself accountable for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of scholarly records. If an author is found to be involved in research misconduct or other serious deviations concerning published articles in scientific journals, the Editor is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

In the event of allegations, the Editor and Editorial Board will employ COPE's best practices to assist in resolving complaints and addressing such violations fairly. This will involve an investigation into the allegations made by the Editor. Manuscripts submitted and found to contain such violations will be rejected. In cases where published papers are found to contain such violations, retractions may be published and associated with the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegations and assessing whether the allegations are consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individual reporting the violation has any relevant conflicts of interest.

If there is a possibility of scientific error or other substantial research misconduct, the allegations are communicated to the relevant authors, who, on behalf of all co-authors, are asked to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, further review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases where misconduct is unlikely, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, are published in the form of an editor's letter, often including correction notices and corrections to the published article as sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have a significant obligation to ensure the accuracy of scholarly records. By appropriately addressing concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacements, and retractions, JEBI will continue to fulfill its responsibility to ensure the validity and integrity of the scholarly record.

PUBLICATION DECISION

The decision to publish rests with the Editor of JEBI, who is responsible for determining which submitted articles should be published in the journal. The validation of disputed work and its significance to researchers and readers should always drive this decision. Editors may be guided by the editorial policies of the journal and are constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS

JEBI will have a clear procedure in handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. Complaints will be clarified to a respected person in relation to the complaint case. The scope of the complaint includes anything related to the business process of the journal, e.g. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. Complaint cases will be processed in accordance with COPE guidelines. Complaint cases can be sent via email to: jebi@analysisdata.co.id.

FAIR PLAY

An editor will always evaluate a manuscript based on its intellectual content, without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.

CONFIDENTIALITY

Editors and editorial staff should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

DISCLOSURES AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted manuscript may not be used in the editor's own research without written permission from the author.

REVIEWER DUTIES

  1. Editorial Decision Contribution:

Peer reviews aid editors in making editorial decisions, and through editorial communication with authors, they can also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

  1. Appropriateness:

Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review is not possible should inform the editor and request permission to be excused from the review process.

  1. Confidentiality:

Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It should not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

  1. Objectivity Standards:

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  1. Source Acknowledgment:

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported should be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also alert the editor if there is substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they are personally aware of.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts that have conflicts of interest caused by competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper..

AUTHOR'S DUTY

  1. Reporting Standards:

Authors of original research reports must present accurate reports of the work conducted and provide an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately presented in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to enable others to replicate the work. False or deliberately inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

  1. Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility:

Authors are required to provide raw data in connection with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if possible, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable period after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

  1. Originality and Plagiarism:

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

  1. Duplicate, Overlapping, or Concurrent Publication:

In general, an author should not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.

  1. Source Acknowledgment:

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite influential publications in determining the nature of the work reported.

  1. Authorship and Article Contribution:

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research reported. All parties who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

  1. Fundamental Errors in Published Works:

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

ETHICAL SUPERVISION

If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript to comply with ethical research behavior using human and animal subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethics clearance from the association or legal organization.

If the research involves proprietary data and business/marketing practices, authors must clearly explain whether the data or information will be securely concealed or not.