Publication Ethics | JIPOR: Jurnal IPTEK Olahraga dan Rekreasi

The statement of scientific publication ethics is a code of ethics for all parties involved in the process of publishing a scientific journal, including: the Journal Manager, Editors, Peer Reviewers, and Authors. This code of ethics is based on the Regulation of the Head of LIPI No. 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publication, which emphasizes three ethical values in publication:

Neutrality, i.e., being free from conflicts of interest in publication management;
Justice, i.e., granting authorship rights to those who are entitled to be listed as authors; and
Honesty, i.e., being free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publication.

This guideline for the ethics of scientific publication is translated and adopted based on Elsevier’s publication ethics policy, which includes:

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF:

Determining the journal name, scientific scope, publication frequency, and accreditation if necessary.
Appointing editorial board members.
Defining the relationship between the publisher, editors, peer reviewers, and other relevant parties.
Respecting confidentiality concerning contributing researchers, authors, editors, and reviewers.
Enforcing norms and regulations related to intellectual property rights, particularly copyright.
Reviewing journal policies and conveying them to authors, editors, reviewers, and readers.
Establishing a code of conduct for editors and reviewers.
Publishing the journal regularly.
Ensuring the availability of financial resources to sustain journal publication.
Building networks for cooperation and marketing.
Improving journal quality.
Handling permits and other legal aspects.
The Editor-in-Chief's decisions are final based on the submitted articles.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS:

Publication Decisions: Editors of Jurnal Iptek Olahraga dan Rekreasi (JIPOR) are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles will be published. These decisions are based on the article’s validity and its contribution to researchers and readers. Editors follow the editorial board's policies and applicable legal requirements, such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other reviewers or editors in making decisions.
Objective Assessment: Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual content without discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race, gender, nationality, etc.
Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, and the editorial board.
Conflicts of Interest: Submitted materials that are not yet published may not be used in the editor’s own research without the author's written permission. Information or ideas obtained through blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, institutions, or companies involved.
Cooperation in Investigations: Editors must take responsive steps if ethical complaints are filed concerning a submitted or published manuscript. Editors may contact the authors and provide clarifications or recommendations. If necessary, further communication with institutions or research bodies may be required. After resolution, actions such as issuing corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other statements should be considered.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWERS:

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Blind peer reviews by reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and can help authors improve their work through editorial communication. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and the scientific method.
Timeliness: Reviewers who feel unqualified or unable to review a manuscript in a timely manner must notify the editor promptly.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shown to or discussed with others without the editor’s authorization.
Objectivity: Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. Any previously published observation or argument should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. Reviewers must inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work they are aware of.
Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the author(s), companies, or institutions connected to the work.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS:

Writing Standards: Authors must present accurate accounts of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Data should be accurately represented in the manuscript. The manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible, and retain the data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism: Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works and that any work or words of others have been appropriately cited. Forms of plagiarism include claiming others’ work as one's own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another work without attribution, and claiming results from research conducted by others. Self-plagiarism or auto-plagiarism—reusing one's previously published work without proper citation—is also unethical.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submissions: Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is unethical and unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of others' work must always be given. Authors must cite publications that have influenced their own work. Information obtained privately must not be used without explicit written permission from the source.
Authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All such contributors should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and Human Subjects: If the manuscript involves procedures or equipment that present unusual hazards, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the research involves human subjects, the author must ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were conducted in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that approval was obtained from appropriate committees. A statement confirming informed consent must be included. Privacy rights of human subjects must always be respected. Written consent must be obtained for publication of case details or personal information.
Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If a third party informs the editor of a significant error, the author is responsible for retracting or correcting the work or providing evidence of its accuracy.