Publication Ethics and Misconduct

JHCJ is a peer-reviewed journal. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles in this journal, as well as alleged research violations, including the authors, editor-in-chief, Editorial Board, peer reviewers, and the publisher of Universitas Proklamasi 45. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Guidelines for Journal Publication Ethics

Articles in JHCJ are an important building block in the development of a coherent and respected knowledge network. This 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. Therefore, it is important to agree on the standards of ethical behavior expected of all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the public.  

Universitas Proklamasi 45, as the publisher of JHCJ, takes the duty of guardianship over all stages of publishing very seriously, and we are aware of our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Alleged Research Infringement Research

The error means falsification, manipulation of citations, or plagiarism in producing, conducting, or reviewing research and writing articles by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to be involved in research violations or other serious irregularities involving articles that have already been published in a scientific journal, the Editor has a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected violations, the Editors and the Editorial Board will use COPE best practices to help them resolve complaints and deal fairly with violations. This will include an investigation into the allegations by the Editor. Submissions found to contain these errors will be rejected. In cases where the published paper is found to contain such errors, a retraction may be issued and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether the allegations are consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individual committing the offense has a relevant conflict of interest. 

If a scientific error or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the appropriate authors, who, on behalf of all co-authors, are asked to provide detailed responses. Once responses are received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) can be obtained. For cases where infringement is unlikely, clarification, additional analysis, or both, published as a letter to the editor, and often including notification of corrections and corrections to the published article, is sufficient. 

Institutions are expected to carry out proper and thorough investigations into suspected scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of scientific records. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific errors and taking the necessary actions based on the evaluation of these issues, such as corrections, retractions with replacements, and retractions, the JHCJ will continue to fulfill its responsibility to ensure the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication Decisions 

The editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal's editorial board and limited by legal requirements such as those that would apply regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Complaints and Appeals

JHCJ will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. Complaints will be forwarded to a designated person for review. The scope of the complaint includes everything related to the journal's business processes, i.e., editorial processes, manipulation of found citations, unfair editors/reviewers, peer-review manipulation, etc. Complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guidelines.

Post-publication

Discussion permits the publication of debate posts either on its website, by letter to the editor, or on a moderated external site.

Fair play

An editor evaluates manuscripts at all times for their intellectual content regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

Editors and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Data Sharing Policy

JHCJ is committed to a more open research landscape, facilitating faster and more effective research discovery by enabling reproducibility and verification of data, methodologies, and reporting standards. We encourage authors of articles published in our journal to share their research data including, but not limited to: raw data, processed data, software, algorithms, protocols, methods, and materials.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribute to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviews assist editors in making editorial decisions, and editorial communication with authors can also assist authors in improving papers.

Appropriateness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that immediate review is not possible must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

Review Standards: Objectivity reviews

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

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information or privileged ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship or connection with the author, company, or any institution with which the paper is related.

 

Author's Duties

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be represented accurately on paper. A paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Deceptive or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written an entirely original work, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others, then this has been properly cited or cited.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

An author may not, in general, publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or major publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported study. All persons who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or listed as contributors.

 

Correspondence authors must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have approved its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published work

When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal or publisher's editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Ethical Oversight 

If research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript to comply with the ethical conduct of research using both animal and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal and ethical permission from legal associations or organizations. 

If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, the author must clearly justify whether the data or information will be securely hidden or not.