Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Jurnal Psikologi (JPsi) is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal. This statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, the chief editor, associate editors, the editorial board, peer reviewers, and the publisher (Universitas Gadjah Mada). The statement aligns with COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed JPsi journal is a vital element in developing a coherent and respected body of knowledge. It reflects the quality of work from the authors and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed articles uphold the scientific method, making it essential to establish standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing process: authors, editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the wider academic community.
Universitas Gadjah Mada, as the publisher of Jurnal Psikologi, takes its duties in overseeing all stages of publishing very seriously. We are committed to maintaining ethical standards and ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial activities do not influence editorial decisions. The Faculty of Psychology at Universitas Gadjah Mada and the Editorial Board will facilitate communication with other journals and publishers whenever necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in conducting or reporting research. In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will follow COPE's best practices to resolve complaints and address misconduct appropriately.

Steps in Addressing Allegations:

1. Validation and Assessment:
  a. Determine the validity of the allegation and its consistency with the definition of research misconduct.
  b. Assess whether the individual making the allegation has relevant conflicts of interest.
2. Communication with Authors:
  a. Notify the corresponding author, on behalf of all co-authors, of the allegations.
  b. Request a detailed response.
3. Further Investigation:
  a. If necessary, involve experts such as statistical reviewers for additional evaluation.
  b. For less serious concerns, authors may provide clarifications or corrections via written correspondence.
4. Institutional Involvement:
  a. Institutions are expected to conduct thorough investigations of alleged misconduct.

Actions based on evaluations, including corrections, retractions, or retractions with replacement, will ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

Conditions for Retraction:
Articles published in Jurnal Psikologi may be retracted if:

1. There is clear evidence of unreliable findings due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation).
2. The findings were previously published elsewhere without appropriate cross-referencing or permission (redundant publication).
3. The content constitutes plagiarism (similarity index exceeding 20%).
4. The research is deemed unethical.

The retraction mechanism adheres to the COPE Retraction Guidelines, available at https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines

Plagiarism Screening
All submitted work must be original and written in the author's own words. Manuscripts undergo initial screening for similarity using Turnitin, with a maximum similarity index limit of 20%. No single similarity unit may exceed 3%. Allegations of plagiarism are handled in line with COPE guidelines.

The Use of AI-Generated Tools in the Writing Process

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) provides comprehensive guidelines on the ethical use of AI in research publications. Click for more details.

Citations
Authors are discouraged from excessively citing their previous works unless relevant. Citations should provide value and not solely aim to boost citation metrics. We strictly oppose citation pushing, which includes adding redundant or irrelevant references to inflate citation records. Violations may result in work removal and author bans per COPE rules. We encourage quoting relevant prior research to strengthen arguments. Peer reviewers may suggest additional citations to enhance the manuscript.

Authorship
We adhere to COPE guidelines for resolving authorship disputes, which may include:

1. Ghost Authorship: Exclusion of a contributor who has made significant contributions.
2. Gift/Guest Authorship: Inclusion of individuals who did not contribute to the work.
3. Order Disputes: Conflicts regarding author order or contribution levels.

To qualify as an author, individuals must have contributed significantly to the conception or design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation, and participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript.

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 reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse him or herself 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.
Acknowledgment of Sources Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is derived from the previously reported observation or argument should be accompanied by relevant citations. 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.
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 Authors
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.
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.
Originality and Plagiarism Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications The author should not in general submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced.
Authorship and Contributorship of the Paper The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgment section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted manuscript, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Duties of Editors
Editors are responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. These decisions are guided by the journal's editorial policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making publication decisions.
Manuscripts are evaluated based on intellectual content without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality
The editor and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than:

1. The corresponding author,
2. Reviewers and potential reviewers,
3. Other editorial advisers, and
4. The publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the editor’s own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Additionally, privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.