Publication Ethics

The journals published by Universitas BPD are committed to ensuring the highest standards of publication ethics. All parties involved in the act of publishing—authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—must agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. Our ethics statements are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

???? Duties of Authors

• ▪ 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.
• ▪ Multiple or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
• ▪ Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
• ▪ Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

⚖️ Duties of Editors

• ▪ Publication Decisions: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, based on the validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers.
• ▪ Fair Play: An editor evaluates 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, and the publisher.

???? Duties of Reviewers

• ▪ 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.
• ▪ Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
• ▪ 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.
• ▪ Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.