Publications Ethics

Publication Ethics Statement

To approve the quality of the manuscript and cancel the agreement / plagiarism in the agreed process, the editorial board approved the ethics of the scientific publication of the Jurnal Sosio-Komunika. The ethical rules of this publication apply to writers / authors, editors, bestari partners / reviewers, and managers of journals / editors. The publication ethics are published in the Publications Ethics Committee (COPE).

Author Ethics

  1. Reporting; Authors must provide information about the process and results of their research to the editors honestly, clearly, and completely, and store their research data properly and safely.
  2. Originality and plagiarism; The author must prove the manuscript that has been sent / sent to the editor is the original manuscript, written by believers themselves, sourced from ideas and self-study, and not to copy the writings or ideas / ideas of others. The author has issued a strong exclusion of reference sources cited for the names of others.
  3. Repeat shipping; The author must issue a manuscript sent / sent to the editor is a manuscript that has never been sent / sent to the publisher of a journal / other publication. If it is found that there is a "redundancy" of sending the manuscript to another publisher, the editor will reject the manuscript sent by the author.
  4. Author status; The author must communicate this to the writer who has competence or qualifications in a particular field of expertise in accordance with the field of publication science, namely librarianship. The author who sent the manuscript to the editor is the first author (co-author) so that problems can be found in the process that can be resolved immediately.
  5. Error approving script; The author must immediately access to the editor. Found an error found in the script, both the results of the review and edit. The error given can cancel the understanding, the text / agreement, quotations, and other writings that can erase the meaning and consequences of the text. If that happens, the writer must immediately improve the manuscript.

Editor's Ethics

Decision of publication; editors must ensure that the review of the manuscript is comprehensive, transparent, objective, fair and thoughtful. This is the basis for the editor in making decisions on a text, rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as the manuscript selection team.

  1. Information publication; editors must ensure that the writing guidelines for writers and other interested parties can be accessed and read clearly, both print and electronic versions.
  2. Distribution of peer-reviewed manuscripts; the editor must ensure the reviewer and material of the manuscript for review, as well as clearly inform the reviewer of the terms and process of the manuscript.
  3. Objectivity and neutrality; the editor must be objective, neutral, and honest in editing the manuscript, regardless of gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, ethnicity, and author's citizenship.
  4. Confidentiality; editors must maintain all information properly, especially those related to the privacy of the author and the distribution of the manuscript.
  5. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; editors must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing manuscripts runs smoothly and safely.

Reviewer Ethics

  1. Objectivity and neutrality; the reviewer must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favor of scientific truth. The process of studying the manuscripts is done professionally without distinguishing gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and citizenship of the author.
  2. Clarity of reference sources; the reviewer must ensure that the source of reference / citation of the manuscript is appropriate and credible (accountable). If any errors or irregularities are found in writing the reference / quote source, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor to make corrections by the author according to the note of the reviewer.
  3. Peer-review effectiveness; The reviewer must respond to the manuscript that has been sent by the editor and work according to the set of peer-reviewed manuscripts (maximum 2 weeks). If additional time is needed in the review of the manuscript, it must immediately report (confirmation) to the editorial secretariat.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; The reviewer must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing a manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

Journal Management Ethics

  1. Decision-making; the manager of the journal / editorial board must describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to policy making and journal publishing decisions without any particular interest.
  2. Freedom; journal managers must provide reviewers and editors with freedom to create a comfortable work environment and respect the privacy of writers.
  3. Warranties and promotions; Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyrights), and be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. In addition, the journal manager must publish and promote the results of the publication to the public by providing guarantees of benefits in the use of the manuscript.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; Journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing manuscripts runs smoothly and safely.