IJAP is a peer-reviewed journal published by Physics Department Faculty of Science and Mathematics, Sebelas Maret University. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed IJAP is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.  

Sebelas Maret University as publisher of IJAP takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue
has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition,  Sebelas Maret University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the IJAP is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. 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.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must 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

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

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

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. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

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.

Duties of Authors

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

The authors should 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.

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

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

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where 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 on 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.

All authors should 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.

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

Peer-review process

All submitted papers are reviewed using the double-blind peer review process through which advice is asked on individual manuscripts from expert reviewers, available at https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/ijap/about/editorialPolicies#peerReviewProcess. All author names and affiliations are removed before sending the paper out for review. On submission, an article receives a manuscript number. This number should be quoted in all correspondence relating to the article.

New submissions are sent to two independent, anonymous reviewers, selected by the Editor-in-Chief who may be assisted by the appropriate Editorial Board. The recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the authors by the Editor-in-Chief who is responsible for the objectivity of the judgements and findings of the reviews. Revised articles should be sent directly to the Editor-in-Chief. When an article has been accepted, the Editor-in-Chief will inform the author(s) in which issue the paper will be published.

Reviewers have the following responsibilities:

• Reviewers assists the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and in improving the manuscript;
• Reviewers who feel unqualified to provide a scientifically correct review in the amount of time given should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can be contacted;
• Reviewers treat all manuscripts as confidential documents;
• Reviewers must report the Editor-in-Chief if they are aware of any copyright infringement and plagiarism;
• Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments;
• Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

 Human Subjects Research

IJAP requires that research involving human subjects (e.g., surveys, sensory panels, or other participation) complies with all appropriate laws, regulations, and policies (e.g., the Declaration of Helsinki) governing the use of human subjects in research. The authors should state explicitly that institutional review board (IRB) or equivalent approval was obtained before commencement of the study, including the name of the IRB that granted approval. The human object identity as respondent (information source) is securely protected according to the local authority policy.

Animal Experiments

IJAP requires that all research animal activity to be performed in compliance with federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The authors should state explicitly that institutional animal care and use (IACUC) or equivalent approval was obtained before commencement of the study. Authors should make it clear that experiments were conducted in a manner that avoided unnecessary discomfort to the animals by the use of proper management and laboratory techniques. The use of 5 freedom (5F) and 3R principles must be take into account in the experimental design. Experiments should be conducted in accordance with the principles and specific guidelines presented in Guidelines for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching, 3rd ed. (available from FASS Inc., 1800 S. Oak St., Suite 100, Champaign, IL 61820; https://www.adsa.org/Publications/FASS2010AgGuide.aspx). Methods of killing experimental animals must be described in the text. When describing surgical procedures, the type and dosage of the anesthetic agent must be specified.

Plagiarism

“Plagiarism ranges from the unreferenced use of others’ published and unpublished ideas, including research grant applications to submission under “new” authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in a different language” (COPE Guidelines on Good Publication Practice, available at: http://publicationethics.org/).

Examples of plagiarism include using another person’s ideas and/or language as if they were one’s own by quoting or using ideas without citing the source; paraphrasing; cutting and pasting internet-based materials and/or submitting someone else’s work as part of one’s own work.

IJAP do not tolerate plagiarism in any forms and keep the right to check all submissions with appropriate plagiarism check tools. Turnitin software will be used by the Editorial Board to check for similarities of a submitted manuscript with existing literature. Submissions containing plagiarism, in whole or part, are automatically rejected. If plagiarism is discovered post-publication, we will follow the Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern section guidelines of this PEMS document.

The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board will take all the necessary and reasonable steps to identify plagiarism and prevent publishing papers where any research misconduct occur. The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board will, under no circumstances, encourage or knowingly allow such misconducts.

 Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern

The Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board will take Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern in line with COPE’s guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/). If an author has made an error, the journal will issue a corrigendum. If the journal has made an error, this will issue an erratum. Retractions are just reserved for articles that are seriously flawed and their findings and conclusions should not be relied upon. The publisher as well as the Editors are always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

If the journal’s publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, they will deal with such allegations immediately and inform all parties involved. In all cases raised, the Editors will follow COPE’s associated guidelines.