This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Ethics Statement are based on COPEÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
In general, the Ethics of Management Research Studies Journal publication refers to COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Statement of code of ethics for scientific publications is a statement of code of ethics by all parties involved in the process of publishing scientific journals, namely managers, editors, review partners, and authors. Statement of the code of ethics for scientific publications by the Head of LIPI Regulation No. 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications, basically the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications upholds ethical values in three publications, namely: Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in the management of publications; Justice, which gives authorship rights to those who are entitled as writers; and Honesty, which is free from duplication, fabrication, forgery, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publications.
Journal of Research on Banking, Management and Accounting (JRPMA) is a peer-reviewed electronic national journal. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publishing action of articles in this journal, including authors, chief editors, editorial boards, peers and publisher (Perbanas Institute Postgraduate).
Guide to Ethics for Journal Publications
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Journal of Research on Banking, Management and Accounting (JRPMA) is an important building block in the development of a knowledge network that is clear, easy to understand and respected. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the author's work and the institutions that support it. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody scientific methods. Therefore, it is important to agree on the expected ethical standards of conduct for all parties involved in publishing actions: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the public.
Perbanas Postgraduate as the publisher of the journal is responsible for overseeing and monitoring all stages of the publication, and we are aware of our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensure that ads, reprints or other commercial revenue have no impact or influence editorial decisions.
Perbanas Postgraduate as the home of the journal has a responsibility to provide communication and builds partnerships with other institutions to develop the journal, but it doesnâ€™t have power in publication decisions. All publication decisions are under the responsibility of the Editorial Board in a fair and confidential manner.
The validation of the work in question and its importance to the researcher and the reader should always encourage such a decision. Editors can be guided by journal editorial board policies and are limited by legal requirements as applicable in the future because of defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors can talk with editors and other reviewers to make this decision.
The fairness of the game
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content irrespective of race, sex, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship or political philosophy of authors.
The editor and any editorial staff should not disclose any information about the manuscripts sent to anyone other than potential authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisors, and other publishers.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished material disclosed in the submitted manuscript shall not be used in the research editors themselves without the written consent of the author.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review helps editors in making editorial decisions and through editorial communications with authors can also assist authors in rewriting papers.
Any elected referee who feels ineligible to review the research reported in a script or know that his short review will become unlikely to have to notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. They should not be indicated or discussed with anyone other than those authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be done objectively. The author's personal criticism is not right. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
The reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. Any statement that observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by relevant citations. A reviewer should also call the editor's attention to substantial or overlapping equality between the manuscript under consideration and other publication papers with personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Special information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. The reviewers shall not regard manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest due to a relationship, relationship, or competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with any newspaper-related writer, company or institution.
The author of the original research report must present an accurate report of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its importance. The underlying data should be represented accurately on paper. The paper should contain enough detail and referrals to allow others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.
Data Access and Retention
Authors are required to provide raw data in connection with papers for editorial review, and must be prepared to grant public access to the data (in accordance with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Database), if applicable, and should in any case be prepared to store the data for time which is reasonable after publication.
Originality and plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written the original work completely, and if the author has used the work and / or the words of others that have been quoted or quoted appropriately.
Publication of Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent
A writer should not generally publish manuscripts that descriptively describe the same research in more than one major journal or publication. Sending the same script to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
Correct recognition of the work of others must always be given. The author should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported.
Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of reported research. Anyone who has made a significant contribution should be registered as a coauthor. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or registered as contributors. The appropriate author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate coauthors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and have approved the submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
All authors must disclose in their text any conflicts of financial interest or other substantive conflicts that may be interpreted to influence the outcome or interpretation of their manuscripts. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental mistake in published work
When a writer finds significant mistakes or inaccuracies in his or her own work, the writer's obligation to promptly notify journal or publisher editors and work with editors to withdraw or refine the manuscript.