Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

(adapted from Elsevier’s 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 published by Jurnal Lentera Insani (JLI) represents a significant contribution to the development of scholarly knowledge. Each published article reflects the quality of the work of the authors and the academic standards upheld by the institutions that support them. Because peer-reviewed articles embody the scientific method and its norms, all parties involved in the publishing process—authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and scholarly or professional societies—are expected to adhere to rigorous ethical standards.

Jurnal Lentera Insani (JLI) takes its responsibility to safeguard the integrity of the publication process extremely seriously and acknowledges its ethical and professional obligations at every stage of editorial and production work. Jurnal Lentera Insani (JLI) is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint sales, sponsorship, or any other commercial considerations do not influence editorial decisions. Where appropriate, the Editorial Board will also collaborate with other journals and publishers to uphold high ethical standards across the scholarly community.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must provide an accurate and comprehensive account of the work undertaken and present an objective interpretation of its significance. All data should be represented truthfully, and the manuscript should include sufficient methodological detail and appropriate references to enable other researchers to replicate the study. Any form of fabrication, falsification, or knowingly inaccurate statement constitutes unethical behaviour and will not be tolerated. Review articles and professional publications must also provide accurate, balanced, and objective overviews of the relevant literature, while editorial or opinion pieces must be clearly identified as such.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be requested to submit the raw data associated with a manuscript for editorial examination. They should therefore ensure that such data are carefully preserved and remain accessible for a reasonable period following publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors are responsible for ensuring that the manuscript they submit is entirely original. When they draw upon the work or words of others, whether through direct quotation or paraphrase, this must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism, in any of its forms, including the presentation of another person’s manuscript as one’s own, the reproduction or paraphrasing of substantial parts of another work without proper attribution, or the misappropriation of research results generated by others, is considered unethical and unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not submit manuscripts that describe essentially the same research to more than one journal at the same time. Concurrent submission to multiple journals is a serious breach of publication ethics. In addition, previously published material should not be submitted as if it were new, and manuscripts that overlap substantially with work already published by the same author should only be submitted when this is clearly and transparently justified.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must give proper acknowledgement to all sources that have influenced the reported research. Works that were significant in shaping the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study should be cited in the manuscript. Information obtained privately—for example, through personal communication, correspondence, or confidential peer review—may not be used without the explicit written permission of the individuals concerned. Material obtained during the evaluation of grant applications, manuscripts, or other confidential processes must not be used without written consent from the original authors.

Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial, identifiable contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. Those who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Individuals who have contributed primarily to specific aspects of the project, such as technical assistance, data collection, or general supervision, should be appropriately acknowledged but need not be listed as authors. The corresponding author bears the responsibility of ensuring that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and the Use of Human or Animal Subjects

When the research involves hazardous chemicals, procedures, or equipment, the manuscript must clearly identify any unusual risks or safety concerns. For studies involving human participants or animals, authors must ensure that the manuscript includes a statement confirming that all procedures complied with relevant laws, institutional guidelines, and internationally accepted ethical standards, and that approval was obtained from the appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board. In studies involving human subjects, authors must also confirm that informed consent was obtained and that participants' privacy and confidentiality were fully respected.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could be construed as influencing the interpretation of the research. The manuscript should clearly identify all sources of financial support, such as grants, sponsorship, consultancy arrangements, employment, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications or registrations, and any other relevant funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be declared as early as possible, ideally at the time of submission.

Fundamental Errors in Published Work

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, they are obliged to notify the journal editor or publisher without delay and to cooperate in issuing a correction or, where necessary, a retraction. If the editor or publisher becomes aware of a credible claim that a published work contains a serious error, the author must respond promptly, either by correcting the error or providing evidence to support the accuracy of the original publication.

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

Editors of peer-reviewed journals are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be published. Their decisions must be guided by the scholarly merit of the work, its originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s remit, and by the significance of the research to the wider academic community. Editors may consult members of the editorial board, peer reviewers, and, where applicable, representatives of scholarly societies. They must also adhere to legal requirements relating to defamation, copyright, and plagiarism.

Fair Evaluation

Editors must evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their academic content and must not allow considerations such as the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views to influence their decisions.

Confidentiality

Editors and members of the editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. They may not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, selected or potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, unless explicitly authorised or legally required to do so.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not make use of unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. They must avoid handling manuscripts in which they have any conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with any of the authors or associated institutions. In such cases, editors should delegate responsibility to another member of the editorial team. Editors should also ensure that all contributors disclose relevant competing interests and that appropriate action, such as the publication of corrections or retractions, is taken if undisclosed conflicts of interest come to light after publication. Sponsored supplements must be subject to the same rigorous peer-review procedures as the main journal, and any non-peer-reviewed content must be clearly labelled.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors should take all complaints and allegations of ethical misconduct seriously and act in cooperation with the publisher, institutions, and other relevant bodies. This may involve contacting the authors, conducting further investigations, consulting institutional or regulatory bodies, and, where misconduct is confirmed, publishing corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other appropriate statements. Every reported instance of unethical publishing behaviour must be fully investigated, regardless of when it is brought to the editor’s attention.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review supports editors in making informed decisions about the publication of manuscripts and can assist authors in improving their work through constructive feedback. As an integral component of formal scholarly communication, peer reviewing is considered a fundamental academic duty. Jurnal Lentera Insani (JLI) recognises that scholars who submit their work for publication also have a professional obligation to participate in the review process.

Promptness

Reviewers who feel that they are not sufficiently qualified to assess a manuscript, or who know that they will be unable to provide a timely review, should notify the editor immediately and withdraw from the review process. This allows the editor to identify alternative reviewers without undue delay.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers may not share, discuss, or distribute the manuscript or any of its content with others, except when explicitly authorised by the editor for specific consultative purposes.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted impartially and with scholarly rigour. Criticism should be directed towards the manuscript and not towards the author personally. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support their comments with coherent arguments and, where appropriate, relevant references.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should draw the editor’s attention to any relevant published work that is not cited by the authors, particularly where such work appears to be directly related to the research under review. If a reviewer becomes aware of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other published material, they should immediately inform the editor and provide details of the related work.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not use unpublished material from manuscripts they review for their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Any privileged information or ideas obtained through the review process must remain confidential and may not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where they have any conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships with the authors, institutions, or organisations associated with the manuscript.