Publication Ethics

PUBLICATION ETHICS

ASA Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran is an online journal based on peer-reviewed findings published periodically twice a year (July and January). ASA Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran is published with the aim of language and language education, social and humanities education, science education, education issues and policy, educational testing and assessment, curriculum and pedagogies, teaching material development, teaching methodology, education management, teaching innovation and technology, education sciences, education evaluation.

Articles from peer-reviewed findings support and realize a scientific approach. Therefore, a standard of ethical behavior is required for all parties involved in publication: journal editors, peer reviewers, and authors.

This guideline is translated and adopted based on Elsevier's publication ethics policy.

 

EDITORIAL ETHICS STANDARDS

  1. Publication Decision

The Editor of ASA Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran is responsible for deciding which articles to publish from those submitted. This decision is based on the validation of the article and its contribution to researchers and readers. In carrying out their duties, the Editor is guided by the policies of the editorial board and is subject to legal provisions that need to be enforced such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with other editors or reviewers in making such decisions.

  1. Objective Assessment

Editors evaluate a manuscript based on its intellectual content without discrimination on the basis of religion, ethnicity, race, gender, nationality, and others.

  1. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the author, peer reviewers, and editorial board.

  1. Conflict of Interest

Unpublished material submitted to ASA Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran must not be used for the personal research of the editor without written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors should decline to review manuscripts if they have a conflict of interest, caused by competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the author, company, or institution related to the manuscript.

  1. Collaboration in Investigations

Editors must take responsive steps if there are complaints about ethics in submitted or published manuscripts. Editors may contact the authors of the manuscript and provide considerations for the complaint. Editors may also communicate further with relevant institutions or research bodies. When complaints have been resolved, actions such as issuing corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other notes should be considered.

 

PEER REVIEWER ETHICS STANDARDS

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Blind peer review by reviewers assists editors in making decisions and can help authors improve their papers through editorial communication between reviewers and authors. Peer review is an important component of formal scholarly communication and the scientific approach.

  1. Timeliness

If a reviewer assigned feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that it is not possible to review it in a timely manner, the assigned reviewer must immediately inform the editor.

  1. Confidentiality

Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. The manuscript must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

  1. Objectivity

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

  1. Completeness and Authenticity of References

Reviewers should identify unpublished works cited by the author. A statement about observations or arguments previously published must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers must inform the editor of substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published works, as per the reviewer's knowledge.

  1. Conflict of Interest

Unpublished material must not be used for the personal research of the reviewer without written permission from the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts if they have a conflict of interest, caused by competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the author, company, or institution related to the work.

 

AUTHOR ETHICS STANDARDS

  1. Writing Standards

Authors must present accurate papers/articles on their research and provide 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 adequate references to allow others to replicate the work. Deception or presenting inaccurate papers is unethical behavior and unacceptable.

  1. Access to Research Data

Authors may be asked to provide raw data for manuscripts under review and must be able to provide public access to this data if possible, and must be able to store the data for a reasonable period after publication.

  1. Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific works and is unacceptable. Authors must ensure that all work presented is original, and if authors have used the work and/or words of others, then authors must present citations correctly. There are various forms of plagiarism, such as acknowledging the work of others as one's own, copying or rewriting substantial portions of the work of others without citing the source, and claiming research results conducted by others. Self-plagiarism is one form of plagiarism. Self-plagiarism is citing results or sentences from one's own published work without citing the source.