Publication Ethics

Guidelines for the code of ethics for publishing journals adopting the publication ethics policy of Elsevier:
Chief Editor's Ethics:
1. Determine the name of the journal, scientific scope, periodicity, and accreditation if needed.
2. Determine the membership of the editor.
3. Define the relationship between publishers, editors, review partners, and other parties.
4. Appreciate things that are confidential, both for contributing researchers, authors/writers, editors, and review partners.
5. The application of norms and provisions regarding intellectual property rights, especially copyrights.
6. Reviewing journal policies and submitting them to authors, editors, review partners, and readers.
7. Publish journal regularly.
8. Build a network of cooperation and marketing.
9. improve the quality of the journal.
10. licensing and other legal aspects.
11. Editor's decision is final based on the submitted article

Editor's Ethics
1. Publication Decision. The editor is responsible for publishing and deciding which articles will be accepted from the accepted articles. This decision is based on the validation of the article and its contribution to researchers and readers. In policies and policies, Editors are guided by the editorial board and are subject to legal provisions that need to be enforced such as infringement of good name, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors can explain with other reviewers or editors in making these decisions.
2. Objective Assessment. The editor evaluates a manuscript for its intellectual content without discrimination in religion, ethnicity, ethnicity, gender, nation, and others. Editors and editing staff must not disclose any information about accepted manuscripts to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, and the editorial board.
3. Conflict of Interest. Articles that have been submitted and cannot be used for personal research by the editor without written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The editor must refuse to review the manuscript if the editor has a competitive interest, as a result of a relationship, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the manuscript.
4. Cooperation in Investigations. Editors must take responsive steps if there are ethical complaints about accepted manuscripts or found articles. The editor can contact the manuscript writer and give consideration to the complaint. Editors can also carry out further communication with the relevant research institutions or institutions. When the complaint has been resolved, things such as publication of the top, withdrawal, praise, or other notes, need to be considered to be done.

Ethics Reviewer
1. Punctuality. If an assigned reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or finds it impossible to conduct a proper review, the assigned reviewer should immediately contact the editor.
2. Confidentiality. Any manuscript that has been accepted for review must be treated as a confidential document. The manuscript may not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
3. Objective. The review must be carried out objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. The reviewer must clearly state his views with supporting arguments.
4. Completeness and Authenticity of References. Reviewers must identify published works that have not been cited by the authors. A statement about previous observations must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must point out to the editor any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript being reviewed and that which has been proven, according to the reviewer.
5. Conflict of Interest. Article material that has not been used in the reviewer's personal research without written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The reviewer must refuse to review the manuscript if the reviewer has a competitive interest, due to a relationship, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the work.

Writer's Ethics
1. Writing Standards. The author must present an accurate paper/article on the research conducted and present an objective discussion of the significance of the research. Research data must be presented accurately in the article. An article must be sufficiently detailed with sufficient references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraud or inaccurate presentation of papers is unethical and unacceptable behavior.
2. Research Data Access. Authors may be required to provide raw data for the articles to be reviewed and must be able to provide public access to such data where possible, and must be able to retain such data for a reasonable period of time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism. Plagiarism in all forms is an unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and is not acceptable. The author must ensure that all work presented is original, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others, the author must provide appropriate citations. There are various forms of plagiarism, such as admitting other people's writings to be one's own, copying or rewriting substantial parts of other people's work without citing the source, and claiming the results of research conducted by others. Self-plagiarism or auto plagiarism is a form of plagiarism. Auto plagiarism is citing the results or sentences from your own published work without mentioning the source.
4. Terms of Post Submission. Authors may not publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript in more than one journal is an unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and is not acceptable.
5. Inclusion of Reference Sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be done. The author must mention publications that were influential in the preparation of his work. Information obtained personally, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, may not be used or reported without the written permission of the source of the information.
6. Authorship. An author is a person who has made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the writings in the article. All parties who have made significant contributions are listed as co-authors. Corresponding authors must ensure that all co-authors are included in the manuscript, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the work and have approved the submission of the manuscript for publication.
7. Errors in Published Writings. When the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, the author is responsible for immediately notifying the editor of the journal, and working with the editor to retract or correct the article. If the editor receives information from a third party that a published work contains significant errors, it is the author's responsibility to immediately retract or make corrections to the article or provide evidence to the editor regarding the accuracy of the original writing.

Website Administrator Ethics
Website Administrator is the person responsible for managing the journal website. Specifically, the Website Administrator's job scope is as follows:
1. Setting up a journal website;
2. Configure system options and manage user accounts;
3. Register for editors, reviewers, and writers;
4. Manage journal features;
5. View report statistics; and Uploading/publishing accepted papers.