Publication Ethics

 

Publication ethics adapted by COMMON refers to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the regulation of the head of LIPI No. 5 of 2014 on the Code of ethics of scientific publications.

All parties ( Editorial, Reviewer and Authors ) related to scientific publications in COMMON must comply with the publication ethics mentioned above.

International Journal Of Community Service adjusts its Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to meet high quality ethical standards for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an important issue, publication ethics needs to be clearly explained in order to improve the quality of research worldwide. In this section, we describe the standards for editors, authors, and reviewers. In addition, the publisher has no right to interfere with the integrity of the content and only supports publication in a timely manner.

Editor:

1. The Editor shall be responsible for each article published in the International Journal Of Community Service.
2. Editors should assist authors to follow the instructions for authors that we adapted from the International Committee for International Journal Of Community Service.
3. The editors can communicate with other editors and reviewers in making the final decision.
4. An editor must objectively evaluate manuscripts under his authority for publication, assessing each for quality without regard to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors should decline their duties when there is a potential conflict of interest.
5. The Editor needs to make sure the document sent to the reviewer does not contain information from the author, and vice versa.
6. The editor's decision must be informed to the author along with the reviewer's comments unless it contains offensive or defamatory remarks.
7. Editors should honor requests from authors that one should not review submissions, if this is reasonable and practical.
8. The Editor and all staff must ensure the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
9. Editors will be guided by COPE flowcharts in case of suspected errors or disputed posts.

Reviewer:

1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
2. Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
4. 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. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

Author:

1. Authors must agree to the International Journal Of Community Servicewriting ethics statement.
2. The author confirms that the material has never been published before and that they have not transferred the rights to the article elsewhere.
3. Authors must ensure the authenticity of the work and they have correctly mentioned the work of others according to the reference format.
4. Authors should not engage in plagiarism or auto-plagiarism.
5. The publication of 'Salami' is strictly prohibited in the International Journal Of Community Service.
6. Authors should ensure that they follow the writing criteria taken from the International Journal Of Community Service described in the instructions for authors of the International Journal Of Community Service.
7. The author does not suggest any personal information that might make the patient's identity recognizable in the form of part descriptions, photographs or genealogies. Where photographs of patients are important and indispensable as scientific information, the author must have received such consent in written form and have clearly stated it.
8. In the case of experiments on humans, the author must have passed the ethics test through the Ethics Committee of the competent authority.
9. The author must provide the editor with the data and details of the work, if there is suspicion of falsification of data or fabrication.
10. Journal authors should clarify anything that may cause a conflict of interest such as employment, research costs, consultant fees, and intellectual property on disclosure documents.