Publication Ethics

Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Vocational Education (JoMEVE) is a blind peer-reviewed online journal. The code of conduct is designed to provide a set of minimum standards to which all parties involved are expected to adhere. It applies for those who involved in the process of publication, including the author, the editor in chief, the editorial team, the reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in this journal is a fundamental tool to the development of knowledge and thoughts. Therefore, it is important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor, the reviewer, the publisher, and the society. As the publisher, JoMEVE takes responsible over all stages of publishing and it recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. JoMEVE also committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

1. Transparency and Confidentiality

The Journal clearly marked as a peer reviewed journal. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers’ expert in the field who are not part of the journal’s editorial staff. This process should be appreciated by any editorial staff by not disclosing any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2. Copyright and Licensing information

Mechanical Engineering Education, Faculty of Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta as the publisher of JoMEVE hold the copyright regarding all the published articles in this journal. 

Mechanical Engineering Education, Faculty of Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta has the right to multiply and distribute the article and every author is not allowed to publish the same article that was published in this journal.

The author should only submit a manuscript that is free from plagiarism and academically malpractices. The editors and publisher, however have responsible to identify and prevent the indication dealing with allegations of research misconduct, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. It is basically author’s duty to only submit a manuscript that is free from plagiarism and academically malpractices.

3. Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials related to the submitted article should not be used by editors without the author’s permision.

4. Publication Decisions

Each article that has been submitted to JoMEVE will be recorded by the editor and they decide which articles 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 their decisions.

Peer reviewers should :

1. Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
2. Respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
3. Not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
4. Declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
5. Not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors.
6. Be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.
7. Acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and in a timely manner
8. Provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
9. Recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.

Authors should :

1. Responsible for everything published in the journal, and should therefore take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of the material, recognizing the aim and standard of the journal.
2. Present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The information should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Give proper acknowledgment of the work of others. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
6. Listed 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.
7. Notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper, when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work.

Retraction Policy

The papers published in NOZEL will be considered to retract in the publication if:

1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error), or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation)
2. It constitutes plagiarism
3. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication)
4. It contains material or data without authorisation for use
5. Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy)
6. It reports unethical research
7. It has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
8. The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4

Plagiarism Policy