Publication Ethics and Malpractice State

Journal's Statement

Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC), a journal, publishes high-quality research in the broad field of Informatics, Information Systems, and Computer Science, which encompasses software engineering, information system development, computer systems, computer networks, algorithms and computation, and social impact of information and telecommunication technology.

Publication ethics in Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC) refer to COPE (Commitee on Publication Ethics) and Peraturan Kepala LIPI Nomor 5 Tahun 2014.

This statement explains the ethical conduct expected from all parties involved in article publication in this journal, which include authors, reviewers, editorial boards, and publishers.

Publications Ethics Guidelines

Article publications in scientific journals, such as Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC), is essential in science and technology advancement. Journal publication reflects the authors’ work quality and the supporting institutions. Hence it is imperative to have a standard agreement for all parties involved in any publication activities. This includes authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and the public in general.

CV Firmos as the publisher of Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC) is responsible for all stages of publishing. CV Firmos, is a fostering body for the Board of Editors and ensures that editors involved in this publication are of the highest quality in journal administration. CV Firmos is committed to ensuring that advertisements, reprints, or other commercial income have no influence whatsoever on the editor's decision. CV Firmos will facilitate communication with related parties (writers or other journals) when needed.

Publication Decision

The chief editor of Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC) is responsible for making decisions whether to accept or reject submitted manuscripts. The Board of Editors’ activities are guided and regulated by a policy which complies to legal provisions, such as with regard to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Board of Editors seek to ensure that the published works are not work of plagiarism. The editors may communicate with the reviewers and the editors of other journals in making this decision.

The editorial board always strives to ensure that every article published in Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC) has been through a peer review process to ensure the quality to contribute to science and education.

Fair Play

The editors evaluate each submitted manuscript based on its intellectual content, regardless of race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of the authors. 

Privacy Policy

The editors and any editorial staff will not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to any party other than the authors, reviewers, or other personnels who are in the Board of Editors and the publisher.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interests

Author(s) should notify the editors if there is a substantive conflict of interest in the publication process. Rejected manuscripts will not be used as the editors’ or reviewers’ research material without proper agreement with the author(s).

Policy Statement

Content Integrity and Maintenance

Article Retraction

• There is major scientific error that would invalidate the conclusions of the article, for example where there is clear evidence that findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication).
• There are ethical issues such as plagiarism (appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit including those obtained through confidential review of others' manuscripts) or inappropriate authorship.

• An article requiring potential retraction is brought to the attention of the journal editor.
• The journal editor should follow the step-by-step guidelines according to the COPE flowcharts (including evaluating a response from the author of the article in question).
• Before any action is taken, the editor's findings should be sent to the Chief Editor. The purpose of this step is to ensure a consistent approach in accordance with industry best practices.
• The final decision as to whether to retract is then communicated to the author and, if necessary, any other relevant bodies, such as the author's institution on occasion.
• The retraction statement is then posted online and published in the next available issue of the journal (see below for more details of this step). 

Article Withdrawal

• If the author requests the withdrawal of his/her manuscript when the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author will be punished by paying $50 USD per manuscript.
• If the withdrawal of the manuscript after the manuscript is accepted for publication; the author will be punished by paying $75 USD per manuscript.
• If an article has been published as "Article in Press" (articles that have been accepted for publication but which has not been formally published and will not have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article (s), or are determined to violate our journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), maybe "Withdrawn "From the Journal of Informatics Computing (JIC) website. Withdrawing means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is deleted and replaced with an HTML page and PDF simply states that the article has been withdrawn. In this case, the author will be punished by paying $100 USD per manuscript.
• If the author doesn't agree to pay the penalty, the author and his/her affiliation will be blacklisted for publication in this journal (3 years).
• If the author request to withdraw a manuscript, an official letter signed by the corresponding author and agency leader must be sent to the Principal Editor.

Article Correction

• A small part of an otherwise reliable publication reports flawed data or proves to be misleading, especially if this is the result of honest error.
• The Author or Contributor list is incorrect (e.g. a deserving Author has been omitted or someone who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).

• Publisher correction (erratum): to notify readers of an important error made by publishing/journal staff (usually a production error) that has a negative impact on the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or on the reputation of the Authors or the journal.
• Author correction (corrigendum): to notify readers of an important error made by the Authors which has a negative impact on the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or on the reputation of the Authors or the journal.
• Addendum: an addition to the article by its Authors to explain inconsistencies, to expand the existing work, or otherwise explain or update the information in the main work.

Article Removal

Article Replacement

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards:Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.

3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.

4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

5. Authorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.

7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editors

1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.

4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.

5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.

3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work

4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.  Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.