Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics (e-ISSN: 2621-086X) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Study Program of Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Sebelas Maret .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 Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics journal 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. 

 Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Sebelas Maret as publisher of Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics journal 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, the Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences Universitas Sebelas Maret 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 Indonesian Journal of Applied Statistics journal 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

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

 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.

Promptness

 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.

Confidentiality

 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.

Standards of Objectivity

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

Acknowledgement of Sources

 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.

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.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

 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.

Data Access and Retention

 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.

Originality and Plagiarism

 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.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

 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.

Acknowledgement of Sources

 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 of the Paper

 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.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

 If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

 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.

Fundamental errors in published works

 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.

Plagiarism Policy

We maintain a strong commitment to academic integrity and uphold the highest standards of ethical writing.

We are strictly against plagiarism in any form. All submitted manuscripts will be screened for textual similarities using plagiarism detection tools. However, authors are strongly encouraged to conduct a self-assessment of their manuscripts prior to submission to ensure originality and proper citation of all sources.

• Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 20% will be automatically rejected without further consideration.
• This threshold excludes properly cited references and standard terminologies but includes all forms of unattributed copying.

Authorship & Contributorship

Authorship is reserved for individuals who have made substantial and meaningful contributions to a manuscript. These contributions must go beyond routine or administrative tasks and involve intellectual input at various stages of the research process. To be listed as an author, one must meet all of the following conditions: (1) significantly contributed to the study’s conception or design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation; (2) participated actively in drafting the manuscript, providing substantial revisions, or critically reviewing it for important intellectual content; (3) approved the final version of the manuscript for submission and publication; and (4) agreed to be accountable for the integrity of the entire work, including resolving any questions related to its accuracy or ethical conduct.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that every listed co-author fulfills these criteria and that no inappropriate authors are included. All co-authors must have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors are discouraged after submission and will only be considered under special circumstances. In such cases, the corresponding author must provide a detailed justification and written consent from all affected authors. Once a manuscript is accepted, changes in authorship are subject to editorial approval and may be declined if appropriate documentation is not provided. If a change is required post-publication, it will be handled through a formal correction notice.

Contribution Details

To enhance transparency in scholarly publishing, The journal encourages authors to clearly outline the specific contributions made by each co-author. This should be done using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework, which provides standardized terms for different roles such as conceptualization, methodology, software development, validation, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing, visualization, supervision, project administration, and funding acquisition. Each author’s name should be followed by the roles they performed, and this contribution statement will appear alongside the published article. At least one author should serve as the guarantor who accepts full responsibility for the integrity of the work from start to finish.

In addition to named authors, individuals who contributed to the project in other capacities such as through technical support, funding acquisition, general supervision, or scholarly discussion should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgments section. Their full name and affiliation must be included, and authors are responsible for notifying them and obtaining their consent to be listed. If groups or institutions contributed to the study in a collective capacity (e.g., clinical investigators or supporting institutions), their role should be briefly described.

Any assistance from AI-based tools (such as large language models used for drafting or editing text) must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript. While these tools may assist the writing process, the human authors remain fully responsible for ensuring the originality, accuracy, and ethical compliance of the content.

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Authorship is reserved for individuals who have made substantial and meaningful contributions to a manuscript. These contributions must go beyond routine or administrative tasks and involve intellectual input at various stages of the research process. To be listed as an author, one must meet all of the following conditions: (1) significantly contributed to the study’s conception or design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation; (2) participated actively in drafting the manuscript, providing substantial revisions, or critically reviewing it for important intellectual content; (3) approved the final version of the manuscript for submission and publication; and (4) agreed to be accountable for the integrity of the entire work, including resolving any questions related to its accuracy or ethical conduct.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that every listed co-author fulfills these criteria and that no inappropriate authors are included. All co-authors must have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors are discouraged after submission and will only be considered under special circumstances. In such cases, the corresponding author must provide a detailed justification and written consent from all affected authors. Once a manuscript is accepted, changes in authorship are subject to editorial approval and may be declined if appropriate documentation is not provided. If a change is required post-publication, it will be handled through a formal correction notice.

Contribution Details

To enhance transparency in scholarly publishing, The journal encourages authors to clearly outline the specific contributions made by each co-author. This should be done using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework, which provides standardized terms for different roles such as conceptualization, methodology, software development, validation, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing-original draft, writing-review and editing, visualization, supervision, project administration, and funding acquisition. Each author’s name should be followed by the roles they performed, and this contribution statement will appear alongside the published article. At least one author should serve as the guarantor who accepts full responsibility for the integrity of the work from start to finish.

In addition to named authors, individuals who contributed to the project in other capacities such as through technical support, funding acquisition, general supervision, or scholarly discussion should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgments section. Their full name and affiliation must be included, and authors are responsible for notifying them and obtaining their consent to be listed. If groups or institutions contributed to the study in a collective capacity (e.g., clinical investigators or supporting institutions), their role should be briefly described.

Any assistance from AI-based tools (such as large language models used for drafting or editing text) must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript. While these tools may assist the writing process, the human authors remain fully responsible for ensuring the originality, accuracy, and ethical compliance of the content.

Conflict of Interest

This journal is dedicated to upholding the highest standards of transparency and ethical conduct in academic publishing. This policy provides definitions of conflicts of interest and describes procedures for addressing conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, editors, the journal, and the publisher, whether identified prior to or after publication. The journal adheres to the Core Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Definition of Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest occurs when an individual or entity has financial, personal, professional, or academic relationships or interests that could influence or appear to influence their objectivity, integrity, or decision-making in the context of research, review, editorial work, or publication processes.

2. Identification of Conflicts of Interest

All participants in the publication process including authors, reviewers, editors, and others are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest relevant to the work they are submitting, reviewing, editing, or publishing. These potential conflicts may include, but are not limited to:

Financial interests: Funding sources, stock ownership, employment, consultancy arrangements, or other financial ties related to the research.

Personal relationships: Close personal or familial relationships with individuals involved in the research or publication process.

Academic relationships: Collaborations or academic affiliations that could affect objectivity or create perceptions of bias.

Competing affiliations: Relationships with competing organizations that might have conflicting interests in the research or its outcomes.

Intellectual property: Ownership of patents, copyrights, or intellectual property rights potentially impacted by the research or publication.

3. Handling Conflicts of Interest

The management will address conflicts of interest with diligence and transparency.

For Authors: Authors are required to disclose all potential conflicts of interest during the manuscript submission process. If a conflict of interest is identified after publication, authors should promptly inform the editorial board. The editorial board will address the conflict transparently and, if necessary, issue corrections or retractions.

For Reviewers: Reviewers must decline invitations to review if they have conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality. If a conflict arises during the review process, reviewers should immediately notify the editorial board for appropriate action.

For Editors and Journal Staff: Editors and journal staff involved in the review and publication process must recuse themselves from handling submissions in which they have conflicts of interest. When uncertainty arises, the editorial board will decide on the appropriate course of action.

For Publishers: The publisher must implement policies to address potential conflicts of interest within its organization. The publisher should ensure that editorial decisions and processes are free from financial or competing interests.

4. Transparency and Disclosure

This journal will clearly outline its conflicts of interest policy and inform all stakeholders of the requirements for disclosure. Disclosures made by authors, reviewers, editors, and other stakeholders will be published alongside the relevant articles, reviews, or editorials to ensure transparency. Additionally, the journal will limit or restrict access to the publication process for editors, reviewers, and stakeholders who co-author articles submitted to the journal.

Post-publication Discussion

We recognizes that scholarly discourse continues beyond publication. The journal encourages constructive and respectful discussion of published articles as a means to advance understanding, clarify findings, and refine knowledge according to the focus and scope. In accordance with COPE’s core practices and WAME’s guidance, post-publication discussions should contribute to the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.

Readers and authors may submit letters to the editor or short commentaries addressing articles published in the journal. Submissions should be concise, supported by relevant evidence, and directly related to the article under discussion. All submissions will undergo editorial assessment to ensure their relevance, scholarly value, and respectful presentation. Where online commenting is available, comments may be moderated to maintain constructive discussion.

Authors of the original article will normally be given an opportunity to respond to substantive comments or critiques. Accepted commentaries and author responses may be published and linked to the original article to facilitate further scholarly exchange. Discussions that identify potential errors or concerns about research integrity will be assessed under the journal’s Corrections and Retractions policy.

Correction and Retraction

This journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. Published articles may require amendment when significant errors, omissions, or concerns about research integrity are identified. Authors, readers, and reviewers are encouraged to report such issues to the Editor-in-Chief, providing specific details and supporting evidence. Reports will be assessed impartially, in consultation with the authors and, where appropriate, reviewers, editorial board members, or relevant institutions, following COPE’s guidance and WAME’s recommendations.

Corrections will be issued when confirmed errors affect the interpretation or understanding of an article but do not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions. Author-originated errors may be addressed through a corrigendum, while errors introduced during journal production may be addressed through an erratum. Each correction notice will clearly describe the error, explain the amendment, and be permanently linked to the original article. Any changes to the published article will be clearly identified to preserve a transparent publication record.

Retraction will be considered when there is clear evidence that an article’s findings are unreliable because of a major error, fabrication, or falsification, or when the publication involves plagiarism, redundant publication, or unethical research. Retraction decisions will be based on the available evidence and the need to protect the scholarly record. A formal retraction notice will identify the article, state who is retracting it, and explain the reasons, distinguishing between honest error and misconduct where possible. The article will ordinarily remain accessible but will be clearly marked as retracted and linked to the notice.

An expression of concern may be issued when substantial concerns exist about an article’s reliability or integrity but the available evidence is inconclusive, or an investigation is ongoing or likely to be prolonged. The notice will explain the concerns and be linked to the article. It will be updated or replaced with an appropriate notice when further evidence becomes available or the investigation concludes. Authors are expected to cooperate with the journal by providing relevant data, explanations, or clarifications needed to resolve post-publication issues.

Ownership and Management

This journal is published by Universitas Sebelas Maret. The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of academic integrity, ethical publishing, transparency, and operational sustainability in accordance with international best practices in scholarly publishing.

This journal upholds full editorial independence. All editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, including originality, scientific quality, relevance, clarity, and compliance with publication ethics. Editorial decisions are made independently by the Editor-in-Chief and editorial team without interference from the publisher or external parties.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy

1. Purpose and Scope

This policy establishes ethical standards for the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in the preparation, review, and publication of scholarly works in the journal.
The journal follows COPE’s Core Practices, emphasizing integrity, accountability, and transparency in AI usage across research and publication activities.

2. Definition of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

AI tools include, but are not limited to, large language models (e.g., ChatGPT, GPT-5, Gemini), generative AI for text, images, translation, or data analysis, and AI-assisted software for writing, paraphrasing, or visualization.
Use of such tools is acceptable only when transparent, ethical, and compliant with COPE standards.

3. Authorship and AI Contributions
Authors must declare any use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-assisted tools in the writing process of their manuscript at the time of submission. This policy applies only to the preparation of text and does not include the use of AI in data analysis or research methods.

1. Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies may be used only to enhance language, grammar, and readability of the manuscript.
2. Use of such tools must be under human oversight and editorial control. Authors must carefully check, revise, and approve the content, as AI-generated text may be inaccurate, incomplete, or biased.
3. Full responsibility and accountability for the article rests with the authors.
4. Generative AI or AI-assisted tools must not be listed or cited as authors or co-authors.

4. Declaration of Generative AI in Scientific Writing

A declaration must be included in a separate section before the References list.

5. AI Use in Peer Review and Editorial Process

Editors and reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts or confidential content into AI tools.

AI may only be used to assist with grammar, summarization, or metadata analysis, ensuring confidentiality and data protection.
Peer review decisions must remain fully human-driven.

6. Transparency and Disclosure

All AI use in manuscript preparation, data analysis, or visualization must be clearly described.

The journal may request details about the tools used, including version, platform, and prompts.
Undisclosed AI use may trigger a research misconduct investigation.

7. Data privacy and Intellectual Property

Authors must not input confidential or copyrighted data into AI tools.

AI outputs may lack copyright protection; authors are responsible for verifying ownership and avoiding IP infringement.
The journal is not liable for legal issues from unauthorized AI use.

8. Generative AI in Figures, Images, and Artwork

Generative AI use in visual materials is subject to strict regulation. Figures, images, and artwork represent an essential component of the scientific record. Improper use of AI-assisted technologies may compromise accuracy, originality, and copyright compliance. Therefore, the journal establishes the following rules:

1. Authors must not use generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create, modify, or enhance images, figures, or artwork in submitted manuscripts.
2. Authors may use AI-assisted tools only when these tools form part of the research methodology (for example, biomedical imaging). In this case, authors must report the use clearly in the Methods section by including:
• The name of the tool or model
• The version and extension numbers
• The manufacturer or source
3. Authors must not use generative AI or AI-assisted tools to produce graphical abstracts.

9. Ethical Oversight and Misconduct

Undisclosed or improper AI use that results in falsification, plagiarism, or misrepresentation constitutes research misconduct.
Cases will be investigated following COPE’s Ethical Oversight Guidelines, which may result in rejection, retraction, or institutional notification.

10. Policy Review and Updates

This policy will be reviewed annually by the Editorial Board to ensure alignment with evolving COPE and international publishing standards.
Revisions will be published on the journal’s website upon approval.