This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher (Universitas Islam Balitar). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed 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.
Universitas Islam Balitar as the publisher of Konstruktivisme : Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing 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.
Publication decisions
The editor of Konstruktivisme : Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran 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 evaluates 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Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.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.
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 behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgment 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.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other 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.
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.
Allegations of Research Misconduct
Journal is committed to upholding scientific integrity, transparency, and publication ethics. Any allegations of ethical breaches or research misconduct—whether concerning submitted manuscripts or already published articles—will be addressed in a serious, objective, fair, and confidential manner, in accordance with established publication ethics guidelines.
1. Types of Research Misconduct
Allegations of research misconduct may include, but are not limited to:
Data fabrication: Creating or inventing data or research results that were never actually obtained.
Data falsification: Manipulating research materials, processes, data, or results such that they no longer accurately reflect the actual findings.
Plagiarism: Using the ideas, writing, data, or work of others without proper acknowledgment or attribution.
Authorship manipulation: Including individuals who do not meet authorship criteria, or omitting individuals who should have been credited as authors.
Violations of research ethics: Including breaches related to participant consent, data confidentiality, or failure to obtain required ethical approval.
Manipulation of the publication process: Including inappropriate citation practices, redundant (duplicate) publication, or interference with the peer-review process.
Misuse of artificial intelligence (AI): Including the use of AI in ways that violate journal policy, or the generation of invalid content, data, or references without the required disclosure.
2. Procedures for Handling Alleged Misconduct
Allegations of misconduct may be reported by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, or any other party with relevant information. Reports should be accompanied by sufficient evidence or supporting information.
The journal management will take the following steps:
Receipt of the report: The editor receives and documents the report regarding the alleged misconduct. Initial assessment: The editor evaluates the relevance and validity of the report and examines the preliminary evidence available.
Clarification: If necessary, the editor may request an explanation from the author(s) and may contact the author’s affiliated institution or other relevant authorities.
Further examination: Allegations requiring an in-depth inquiry may be referred to the relevant institution or the party authorized to conduct such investigations.
Decision-making: The editor determines the appropriate editorial action based on the available evidence, the results of the examination, and the journal’s publication ethics policy.
The entire process is conducted objectively, ensuring that the involved parties are given the opportunity to provide an explanation. The confidentiality of the identities of both the person reporting the issue and the person(s) reported is maintained to the extent possible throughout the examination process.
3. Editorial Actions
Based on the results of the examination and the severity of the misconduct, Juornal may take appropriate actions, including:
Requesting clarification, corrections, or revisions to the manuscript.
Rejecting a manuscript that is proven to have violated publication ethics.
Publishing a correction or an "expression of concern" if there are issues that need to be brought to the attention of the readers.
Retracting an article if a serious violation is discovered that meets the criteria for retraction.
Reporting the allegations or findings to the author’s institution or relevant authorities, as necessary and in accordance with applicable regulations.
Editorial actions are determined based on the evidence and the proportionality of the misconduct. An alleged violation is not automatically considered a proven violation.
4. Responsibilities of Authors, Editors, and Reviewers
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submitted work meets the standards of research integrity and ethics, and for providing accurate information throughout the review and examination process.
Editors are responsible for handling reports fairly, maintaining the independence of editorial decisions, and taking appropriate actions based on the available evidence. Reviewers who discover indications of ethical misconduct are expected to report them to the editor, providing a relevant explanation, without conducting an independent investigation or disseminating unverified allegations.
5. Commitment to Publication Integrity
Journal is committed to implementing a process for handling suspected instances of misconduct.
