Publication Ethics

All parties involved in the UCEJ publishing / publication process, Journal Managers, Editors, Sustainable Partners and Authors must understand and comply with the norms / ethics of scientific publications. This statement refers to LIPI Head Regulation No. 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications. Scientific work for publication, basically must uphold three ethical values ​​in publications, namely; (i) Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in managing publications; (ii) Justice, which gives authorship rights to those who are entitled as authors / authorship; and (iii) Honesty, which is free from Duplication, Fabrication, Counterfeiting and Plagiarism (DF2P) in publication. The rules on this page also comply with the COPE Best Practices Guidelines for Journal Editor.

The following is a statement regarding the publication ethics for UCEJ published by UCEJ with the Indonesian Pancasila and Professional Citizenship Education Association (AP3KnI):

Articles published at UCEJ publish reviews on the development of knowledge covering the scientific fields of Pancasila and Citizenship Education (PPKn), Law, politics, social and culture. The PPKn domain examines the development of knowledge related to education in learning, study studies, classroom action research, class management, schools, and education policy. The legal domain examines criminal law, civil law, constitutional law, political law, customary law, agrarian law and international law. The political domain examines democracy, governance, elections, policy, and international relations. The social domain examines the social sciences that develop in society. The cultural environment examines local and national cultures. The five scientific fields in this journal are expected to be a bridge for the development of collaborative science.Providing quality articles is our hope in every issue. Therefore, it is important to state an agreement on standards of ethical behavior that will be understood and carried out by managers and writers. This is expected to be a major supporter of efforts to present qualified articles to the target audience.

 

The Editorial Team of the Ideas Journal is committed to ensuring the procedures carried out by both the manager and the writer in accordance with the agreement. Furthermore, editors and reviewers evaluate the text without regard to race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or certain political and group interests. For more details, the following will describe the task of the writer and manager.

 

Make sure that is selected / corrected for the review process.

 

1. JOURNAL CODE OF PUBLISHER CODE
2. Determine the name of the journal, the scope and purpose of the background of science and the timeline of each publication.
3. Assign editorial board membership and peer review as their responsibility for the task.
4. Determine the relationship between the publisher, editor, peer review and other parties in a short contract.
5. Apply the confidentiality of researchers, writers, editors and peer reviews who contributed to this journal.
6. Establish norms and regulations regarding intellectual property rights, especially for authors' copyrights.
7. Conduct policy reviews on journals and provide authors, editorial boards, peer reviews, and readers.
8. Establish code of ethics guidelines for editors and peer reviews, including behavior.
9. Publication of a regular journal with the principal of equality.
10. Ensure the availability of resources for ongoing publications.
11. Increase cooperation and networking for journal distribution.
12. Ensuring ethics, licensing and other legal aspects.

 

II ETHICS EDITOR

1. Ensuring the quality of publications.
2. Articles that meet the requirements are eligible to maintain the published paper process.
3. Maintain flexibility in communication, including expressing opinions, and ensuring the identity of the article or the identity of the author to other parties.
4. Maintain the author's academic track record for integrity of respect
5. Send corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, and apologies through the article if necessary.
6. Authorize the responsibility for organizing and formatting the article, while the content and statements, and / or citations in it are the property of the author.
7. Journal assessments and attitude policies published from authors and peer reviews due to integrity, loyalty, quality and sustainability.
8. Willing to acknowledge other opinions, points of view or perspectives that are different from others based on politeness to improve journals
9. Prohibit your own opinion which can lead to wrong decisions.
10. Encourage and motivate writers, because the revision of the article and correct publication right.

 

III. REVIEW OF ETHICS

1. Accept the editor's job to review the article and send a review to the editor, taking into consideration the publication's decision.
2. Frequently review articles (on time) according to the author's guidelines based on scientific principles (data collection methods, author's legality, conclusions, etc.) in the structure of writing.
3. Carefully review articles according to the style and scope of the journal.
4. Encourage writers in making improvements in their articles by providing feedback, suggestions, criticisms, and recommendations.
5. Maintaining authorship privacy by covering the results, suggestions, and recommendations with the author's receipt.
6. Reviewers cannot review articles involving reviewers who work, directly or indirectly.
7. Follow the guidelines in reviewing papers and evaluating paper evaluation forms provided by journal editors.
8. Review papers substantively by not improving grammar, punctuation and typos in the article being reviewed.
9. Ensuring the principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritizing the benefits of paper due to the development and dissemination of science, technology, and innovation; also consider the development of the effects of scientific writing.
10. Prohibiting the defense of one's own opinion, the author or a third party who can produce a reference decision is not objective.
11. Establish objectivity values ​​and be free from conflicting interests.
12. Secure the confidentiality of article findings until published.
13. Focus on expertise and provide article reviews correctly and correctly.
14. Refuse to do a review if an article is not in accordance with their area of ​​expertise. Instead, the peer review must provide recommendations to the author if there are other experts on this issue.
15. Having an open-minded personality in accepting opinions or perspectives that are different from personal opinions.
16. Restores art