Publication Ethics

This statement sets out the publication-ethics principles of Jurnal Pelita Raya (JPR), published by Mahkota Science Publishers. It has been adapted from the principles and best-practice guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Elsevier’s policies and guidelines on ethical publishing.

JPR is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and accountability throughout the scholarly publishing process. This statement defines the ethical responsibilities of authors, reviewers, members of the Editorial Board, and the Editor-in-Chief. All parties are expected to uphold the integrity of the scholarly record and to conduct themselves in accordance with internationally recognised standards of responsible research and publication.

Duties of Authors

Authors bear primary responsibility for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and ethical acceptability of their submissions. Only original work that makes a substantive scholarly contribution should be submitted to JPR.

A manuscript must not have been published previously in substantially the same form. Authors must not reproduce or republish work that has appeared in another journal without appropriate disclosure, citation, justification, and permission.

Authors must not submit the same or a substantially similar manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. A manuscript under review or consideration by JPR may be submitted elsewhere only after the journal has issued a formal rejection or has officially approved the authors’ request for withdrawal.

All authors must have made a significant scholarly contribution to the work and must accept responsibility for its content. They are collectively accountable for addressing questions concerning the accuracy, reliability, or integrity of any part of the manuscript.

Authors are expected to cooperate with editors and reviewers throughout the evaluation process. They must provide clarifications, supporting evidence, underlying data, or other relevant documentation where reasonably requested.

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted or published article, the author must notify the Editor-in-Chief or publisher without delay. The author must cooperate fully with the journal in issuing an appropriate correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must submit only original work that has not been plagiarised, published previously, or submitted concurrently to another journal. The words, ideas, arguments, data, images, figures, tables, methods, and other intellectual contributions of third parties must be acknowledged accurately through appropriate citation and referencing.

Verbatim material must be clearly identified and accompanied by an appropriate citation. Close paraphrasing, unattributed translation, appropriation of ideas, and the reproduction of another person’s intellectual contribution without acknowledgement may constitute plagiarism even where the original wording has been modified.

The editorial office may use recognised similarity-detection software to compare submitted manuscripts with existing literature. Similarity reports will be interpreted through informed editorial judgement. A similarity score does not, by itself, establish whether plagiarism has occurred; the context, extent, attribution, and intellectual significance of the overlapping material must also be considered.

Fabricated, falsified, fraudulent, or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable. Where plagiarism or another serious ethical violation is identified, the journal may reject the manuscript, correct or retract the published article, notify an appropriate institution, or undertake other proportionate action consistent with recognised publication-ethics procedures.

Accuracy and Reporting Standards

Authors must report their research clearly, honestly, accurately, and comprehensively. Fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, inappropriate data manipulation, and the deliberate suppression of relevant findings are serious forms of research misconduct.

The evidence presented must support the conclusions of the manuscript. Authors must not exaggerate the originality, significance, generalisability, or practical implications of their findings.

Research methods and analytical procedures should be described with sufficient precision and transparency to permit critical evaluation and, where appropriate, replication or confirmation by other researchers. Relevant methodological limitations, uncertainties, assumptions, and potential sources of bias should be acknowledged openly.

Authors should retain the data and materials underlying their findings for an appropriate period. Where lawful, ethically permissible, and reasonably requested, they should be prepared to provide supporting information for editorial assessment or verification.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must be restricted to individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the reported work. Such contributions may include the conception or design of the study; the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the drafting or substantive critical revision of the manuscript.

Every listed author must approve the final version of the manuscript, agree to its submission, and accept appropriate responsibility for the integrity of the work. Honorary, guest, gift, or coercive authorship is unethical and is not permitted.

Individuals who contributed to the research but do not satisfy the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately, subject to their consent. Their specific contributions should be identified wherever practicable.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all eligible contributors are included as authors, that no ineligible individuals are listed, and that every co-author has reviewed and approved the final manuscript before submission. The corresponding author must also ensure that all co-authors are informed of significant editorial decisions and correspondence.

Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be supported by a satisfactory explanation and the written agreement of all affected authors. The journal reserves the right to request further evidence or decline a proposed change where the justification is inadequate or an authorship dispute remains unresolved.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, commercial, professional, academic, or personal relationship that could influence, or could reasonably be perceived as influencing, the conduct, interpretation, or reporting of their research.

A clear conflict-of-interest statement must be included in the manuscript. Where no competing interests exist, this should be stated explicitly if required by the journal.

All sources of financial support, sponsorship, research funding, material assistance, or other relevant support must be disclosed. Authors should explain the role of the funder or sponsor, if any, in the design of the research; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; the preparation of the manuscript; and the decision to submit the work for publication.

Failure to disclose a material competing interest may lead to additional editorial investigation, rejection of the manuscript, correction of the published record, or other proportionate action.

Multiple, Redundant, and Concurrent Publication

Authors must not publish manuscripts describing substantially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same or a substantially similar manuscript to multiple journals constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Where a manuscript builds upon, extends, translates, or reanalyses previously disseminated research, the relationship between the works must be explained transparently. Authors must cite all relevant earlier publications and disclose potentially overlapping manuscripts to the Editor-in-Chief at the time of submission.

Legitimate secondary publication may be considered only where it serves a defensible scholarly purpose, complies with applicable ethical and copyright requirements, has received the necessary permissions, and is disclosed fully to editors and readers.

Duties of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers contribute directly to the quality, credibility, and integrity of scholarly publication. Reviews must be conducted objectively, fairly, constructively, and professionally. Assessments should be based exclusively on the scholarly quality, originality, methodological rigour, analytical coherence, and relevance of the submission.

Reviewers should accept an invitation only when they possess the necessary expertise and can complete the review within the allocated period. A reviewer may decline an invitation because of insufficient subject knowledge, an inability to complete the assessment on time, or an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest.

Any competing interest that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, impartial judgement must be disclosed before the reviewer accepts the assignment. Where independent assessment cannot be assured, the invitation must be declined.

Reviewers must remain alert to suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, data manipulation, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, or other forms of ethical misconduct. Any concern should be reported confidentially to the Editor-in-Chief and, where possible, supported by specific evidence. Reviewers should not investigate allegations independently or communicate them directly to the authors.

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not disclose, reproduce, distribute, or discuss manuscript content with unauthorised individuals. Unpublished information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, professional, competitive, or commercial advantage.

Reviewers must complete their assessments within the period specified by the journal. Requests for an extension should be made promptly and remain subject to the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

Duties of Editorial Board Members

Members of the Editorial Board are expected to contribute actively to the scholarly development, ethical governance, reputation, and long-term advancement of JPR.

Editorial Board members should serve as responsible ambassadors for the journal by promoting its scholarly objectives, encouraging high-quality submissions, supporting its engagement with the academic community, and strengthening its national and international visibility.

Board members may be asked to review manuscripts, recommend suitably qualified reviewers, provide specialist editorial advice, and contribute to the formulation and periodic evaluation of journal policies. All such responsibilities must be performed impartially, confidentially, professionally, and in accordance with the journal’s ethical standards.

Editorial Board membership must not confer preferential treatment. Manuscripts submitted by Board members must undergo the same rigorous editorial and peer-review procedures as other submissions, with appropriate measures adopted to manage conflicts of interest.

Duties of the Editor-in-Chief

The Editor-in-Chief bears primary responsibility for safeguarding the integrity, quality, consistency, and independence of the journal’s editorial process.

Manuscripts must be evaluated fairly and exclusively according to their intellectual and scholarly merit, including their originality, methodological soundness, analytical quality, relevance, clarity, and contribution to knowledge. Editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial, institutional, political, ideological, or personal influence.

The Editor-in-Chief must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and associated correspondence. Information concerning a manuscript may be disclosed only to individuals directly involved in its evaluation, peer review, production, or ethical investigation, except where disclosure is required by law.

Responsibility for deciding which articles will be published rests ultimately with the Editor-in-Chief. Decisions should take reviewers’ assessments and the advice of Editorial Board members into account, but such recommendations are advisory rather than determinative. Final editorial judgement must be exercised independently and consistently.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that appropriately qualified and impartial reviewers are selected. Any conflicts of interest must be identified and managed, and the peer-review process must be conducted fairly, rigorously, and within a reasonable period.

Prospective contributors must receive clear and accessible guidance concerning manuscript preparation, submission requirements, peer review, ethical disclosure, authorship, and other editorial expectations.

The Editor-in-Chief should actively seek constructive input from authors, reviewers, and members of the Editorial Board regarding the continuing improvement of the journal. Such consultation should support the enhancement of editorial quality, scholarly reputation, accessibility, and international visibility while preserving the journal’s intellectual independence.

Investigation and Corrective Action

JPR will examine credible allegations of publication misconduct irrespective of whether they arise before or after publication. Investigations will be conducted confidentially, impartially, and without prejudging their outcome.

Individuals whose conduct is questioned will ordinarily be informed of the substance of the concern and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Decisions will be based on the available evidence, the journal’s policies, and recognised principles of publication ethics.

Where a concern is substantiated, the journal may request clarification or correction, reject or withdraw a manuscript, publish a correction or expression of concern, retract an article, or notify an appropriate institution or funding body. The action taken will reflect the nature, seriousness, and consequences of the violation.

The principal purpose of corrective action is to protect the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record.