Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The UBMJ (UPY Business and Management Journal) is a blind peer-reviewed journal. This ethical statement governs the behavior of the author, the editor, the reviewers, and the publisher. It is based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. 

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal, UBMJ, significantly contributes to Business and management research. The articles support and embody the scientific method. It is, therefore, necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for the author, the editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher. Department of Management, Universitas PGRI Yogyakarta, as publishers, take their duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. UBMJ is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Duties of authors

Reporting standards

Authors should present a reliable and accurate working paper as well as a discussion of its significance. The data should be reported accurately in the article. A paper has to be equipped with sufficient detail and relevant references. The fraudulent or inaccurate statements that lead to unethical behavior are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

The UBMJ may ask the Authors to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, public access, or retention purposes.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors have to cite and quote appropriately when using the working papers of others. Any form of plagiarism, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's paper to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution) to claiming results from research conducted by others, is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication

Authors are strictly prohibited from concurrently publishing manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. This constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of sources

The author should acknowledge the work of others properly and cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the author’s explicit written permission of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly only to the paper. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The others should be appropriately acknowledged. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Human or animal subjects

Suppose the work involves the use of animal or human subjects. In that case, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. Suppose the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error. In that case, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

 

Duties of editors

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

 

 

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the author’s written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the leading journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely based on academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer-reviewed sections of their journal should be identified.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claims made. Still, they may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies. If the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note may be relevant. Every reported unethical publishing behavior must be considered, even if discovered years after publication.

 

Duties of reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer reviewers assist editors in deciding the editorial aspects and improving the quality of the papers.

Promptness

Whenever the appointed reviewer cannot review for unqualified reasons or respond promptly, they should notify the editor and excuse himself 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 the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. 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 they know personally.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's research without the author’s written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

**These publication ethics are mainly derived from, adapted from, and copied from Geoadria Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.