PUBLICATION ETHICS

JAKU (Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan Unja) (E-Journal) is a blind-review journal published periodically four times a year (January-March, April-June, July-September, and October-December). JAKU publishes writings in the field of accounting and finance that have contributed significantly to the development of accounting science, thought, profession and practice in Indonesia in particular and the world in general.
Publishing articles in blind-reviewed journals is an important part of developing knowledge. Publication is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the author and the institution that houses it. Blind-reviewed articles support and embody a scientific approach. Therefore, a standard of ethical behavior is needed for all parties involved in publication: journal managers, journal editors, bestari partners and authors. This statement is based on the previous COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (click here) and the current COPE's Core Practices.
This scientific publication ethics statement is a statement of the ethical code of all parties involved in the publication process of this scientific journal, namely managers, editors, bestari partners, and authors (authors). The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications essentially upholds three ethical values ​​in publication, namely:

1. Neutrality, namely being free from conflicts of interest in the management of publications;

2. Justice, namely granting authorship rights to those entitled to be authors;

3. Honesty, namely free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism in publications.

PUBLICATION DECISIONS

The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. 

FAIR PLAY

An editor at any time evaluate 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 CONFLICT 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. 

GENERAL DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS

  • Act in a neutral and objective way without discrimination (whether religious, political, gender-based,  ethnic or geographical).
  • Strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
  • Guarantee the quality of the material published and constantly improve the journal.
  • Editors have responsibility to reject/accept an article and should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept.
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record.
  • Prevent business needs compromising intellectual standards.
  • Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS 

1. 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.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

5. 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.

6. 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 AUTHOR

1. 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 behavior and are unacceptable.

2. Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

3. 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.

4. 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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

5. Acknowledgement 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.

6. Authorship and Contributorship of The Article 

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.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.

8. 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.