Publication Ethics

To uphold the highest standards of integrity, validity, fairness, and transparency in scholarly publishing, JUSS (Jurnal Sains dan Sistem Informasi) establishes its publication ethics policy based on internationally recognized guidelines and standards, including the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors , COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Peer Reviewers , Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors , and Elsevier Publishing Ethics .

JUSS adapts its publication ethics policy to the specific characteristics of its subject areas, namely Computer Science and Information Systems, while taking into consideration the responsibilities of all stakeholders involved in the publication process, including readers, authors, reviewers, and editors.

The publication ethics policy of JUSS covers the following areas:

• Authors are responsible for reporting their research findings accurately, honestly, and objectively.
• Authors must ensure that all data presented in their work are represented accurately and without inappropriate manipulation or misrepresentation.
• Authors must ensure that the manuscript contains sufficient methodological detail and relevant references to enable the research to be replicated, verified, or further developed.
• Editors may request additional research data or supporting materials when necessary for the review process.

• Manuscripts submitted to JUSS must be original and must not contain any form of plagiarism.
• Authors must appropriately cite all publications and sources that have influenced the research and the reported work, thereby properly acknowledging the contributions of others.
• Authors must ensure that confidential information, including conversations, correspondence, communications, or discussions with third parties, is disclosed only with the appropriate consent and in accordance with applicable ethical requirements.

• Publishing substantially the same research in more than one journal is prohibited.
• Authors must not submit previously published work for publication elsewhere, except where such material constitutes a thesis, lecture or teaching material, or an electronic preprint, and where such reuse is appropriately disclosed.

• Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, conduct, analysis, or reporting of the research. Authors are required to declare their respective contributions using CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy).
• The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all individuals who qualify for authorship are appropriately included and that the submitted manuscript has been reviewed and approved by all co-authors. The work is considered the collective responsibility of all listed authors.
• Individuals who have contributed to specific aspects of the research or manuscript but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.

• Any use of chemicals, procedures, equipment, or other materials that involve an unusual or significant degree of risk must be clearly identified and appropriately described in the manuscript.

Ethical requirements for research involving human participants or animals follow a tiered approach:

1. Publicly Available or Secondary Data. If a study uses only publicly available or secondary data, authors are required to provide an appropriate statement in the Data Availability section.
2. Human Participants (Surveys, Interviews, or Questionnaires). If the research involves direct interaction with human participants, such as surveys, interviews, or questionnaires, authors must state that informed consent was obtained. Where case details, identifiable information, or personal information are presented, written consent must be obtained from the participant or the appropriate authority.
3. Human or Animal Subjects Undergoing Treatment or Intervention. If the research involves human or animal subjects undergoing a specific treatment or intervention, authors must obtain approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or an equivalent research ethics committee and include an appropriate statement of ethical approval in the manuscript.

• The use of animals as research subjects is expected to be uncommon in JUSS. However, if a submission involves animal subjects, appropriate ethical approval and supporting documentation must be provided.
• Upon request, authors must provide editors with all necessary ethical approvals, consent documentation, permissions, or other supporting materials.

• Authors must disclose any known financial interests, personal relationships, affiliations, or other circumstances that could potentially influence the research or its interpretation. Where no competing interests exist, authors should explicitly state that there are no competing interests.

• Authors must promptly notify the editor if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work and should cooperate with the editor in correcting or retracting the article where necessary.
• If an error is identified by a third party, the authors are expected to cooperate fully with the editors to rectify the record through appropriate correction, clarification, or retraction.

• Image adjustments that are intended solely to improve clarity or presentation are acceptable, provided that they do not alter the underlying information.
• Any image manipulation that changes, obscures, or misrepresents the original meaning or scientific interpretation of the image is prohibited.

• Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and plays a central role in maintaining the quality and integrity of the scientific record. Peer review assists editors in making informed editorial decisions and may also help authors improve the quality and clarity of their manuscripts.
• Reviewers are expected to treat authors and their work with fairness, respect, and professional courtesy, consistent with the standards of good peer-review practice.
• Reviewers who believe that they lack the necessary expertise or are otherwise unable to review a manuscript appropriately should promptly inform the editor and decline the review invitation.

• All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shared with or disclosed to any person without the editor's permission.
• Reviewers must consult the editor before engaging colleagues in co-reviewing or discussing a manuscript in order to ensure confidentiality and appropriate acknowledgment of all individuals involved.
• Reviewers must not use unpublished material, data, ideas, or information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research or personal advantage without explicit written permission from the authors. Privileged information obtained during the peer-review process must remain confidential.

• Reviewers should remain vigilant for potential ethical concerns in submitted manuscripts and promptly report suspected cases to the editor.

• Reviews must be conducted objectively, fairly, and impartially.
• Reviewers should be aware of and disclose any potential personal, professional, or intellectual biases that could affect their assessment.
• Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate and has no place in a scholarly review.
• Potential conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, institutional, or other relationships with the authors, organizations, or institutions associated with the manuscript must be disclosed to the editor before accepting or proceeding with the review.
• Recommendations to cite the reviewer's own work or the work of colleagues must be based solely on legitimate scholarly reasons and must not be intended to increase citation counts or promote the reviewer's own visibility.

• The responsibility for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published rests solely and independently with the editors. Editorial decisions must be based on the scholarly validity, quality, originality, and significance of the work for researchers and readers.
• Editors must follow the policies established by the editorial board and comply with relevant legal and ethical requirements concerning matters such as defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and other applicable issues.

• Editors must ensure that the peer-review process is conducted fairly, objectively, impartially, and within a reasonable timeframe.
• Research articles should be reviewed by at least two qualified reviewers. Editors may seek additional reviews or opinions when necessary.
• Editors must select reviewers based on appropriate subject-matter expertise and take reasonable measures to prevent fraudulent or inappropriate peer review.
• Editors are responsible for carefully evaluating disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and reviewer recommendations for self-citation in order to identify and mitigate possible sources of bias.

• Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on the basis of their intellectual and scholarly merit, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
• The journal's editorial policies should promote transparency, accountability, and comprehensive and accurate reporting. Editors are responsible for ensuring that both authors and reviewers clearly understand their roles, responsibilities, and expectations.
• Editors must use the journal's designated electronic submission and editorial management system for all official journal communications and manuscript-related processes.

• Editors must not attempt to influence the journal's rankings or citation metrics through unethical or artificial practices.
• In particular, editors must not require authors to cite articles published in JUSS or elsewhere unless such citations are clearly justified by legitimate scholarly relevance.

• Editors must safeguard the confidentiality of all manuscripts, supporting materials, and editorial correspondence submitted to the journal. Confidential communications with reviewers must also be protected unless disclosure has been expressly agreed upon by the relevant parties.
• Where necessary to investigate suspected research or publication misconduct, editors may, under appropriate circumstances, communicate limited information with editors of other journals or relevant organizations.
• Editors must protect the identities of reviewers.
• Editors must not use unpublished materials, ideas, data, or information disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without written permission from the authors. Privileged information obtained during peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal or professional advantage.

• Editors must not participate in editorial decisions concerning manuscripts they have authored, manuscripts authored by members of their immediate family, or manuscripts involving products, services, institutions, or organizations in which they have a financial or personal interest.
• Such manuscripts must be handled through the journal's standard editorial procedures, with the peer-review and decision-making processes conducted independently of the relevant author or editor.

• Editors must investigate and appropriately respond to allegations or suspicions of unethical behavior relating to research, publication, peer review, or editorial practices, in cooperation with the publisher and/or relevant scholarly organizations where appropriate.
• Editors are responsible for making appropriate use of the journal's plagiarism and similarity-detection systems, including Turnitin, to help identify potential unethical practices such as plagiarism.
• Where compelling evidence of research or publication misconduct exists, editors should coordinate with the publisher and/or relevant organization to ensure the prompt publication of an appropriate correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other amendment to the published record, depending on the circumstances.