Publication Ethic

Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP) (p-ISSN: 1829-8001 ;
e-ISSN: 2502-7476) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Research Center for Politics-BRIN . A journal aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies focused on nutrition and related topics that have neither been published elsewhere in any language nor are they under review for publication elsewhere. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be appropriately acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: The author should not, in general, submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be identified as such, and the primary publication should be referenced.
  4. Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  5. AAuthorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors in cases where major contributors are listed as authors, while those who made less substantial or purely technical contributions to the research or the publication are listed in an acknowledgment section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the manuscript’s submitted version and their names as co-authors.
  6. 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.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the journal’s editorial board’s policies and constrained by such legal requirements as shall be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the published record’s integrity.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that the editor for originality initially evaluates each manuscript. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, or citizenship of the authors. An essential part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is upholding the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, making it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality, includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The journal editor will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his research without the author’s written consent. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest


Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  2. Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. The relevant citation should accompany any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript. However, the reviewers should keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals’ instructions on the specific feedback and unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback to help the authors improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will strengthen or extend the work
  4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.  Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the author’s identity (s), notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  5. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. Suppose a reviewer feels he/she cannot complete the manuscript’s review within the stipulated time. This information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

Jurnal Penelitian Politik (JPP) is a means of publishing scientific articles containing local, national, and international political issues. Apart from scientific articles, JPP also publishes manuscripts in the form of resumes of research results and book reviews

To maintain the quality of the manuscript and avoid publishing violations or plagiarism in the publishing process, the Editorial Board determines the ethics of scientific publication of the Political Research Journal that applies to writers, editors, reviewers, and journal managers. Research Center for Politics BRIN, which acts as the JPP publisher, is responsible for ensuring that all publishing processes comply with our publication ethics.

Ethics of the Author

  1. Reporting; The writer must provide information about the process and the results of his research to the editor in an honest, straightforward, and comprehensive manner and keep the research data safely and adequately.
  2. Originality and plagiarism; The writer must ensure that the sent manuscript is original, written by himself, originating from his ideas, and not plagiarizing other people’s written works or ideas. The author is strictly prohibited from changing the cited reference sources’ names to other people’s names.
  3. Repeat delivery; The writer must inform that the sent manuscript is a manuscript that has never been submitted to another journal or publisher. If there is a redundancy in sending manuscripts to other publishers, the editorial team will reject the author’s manuscripts.
  4. Author status; The writer must inform the editor that the writer has the competence or qualification in a particular area of expertise by the field of published science. The author who sends the manuscript to the editorial staff is the first author (co-author). If problems are found in the manuscript publishing process, they can be resolved immediately.
  5. Scriptwriting errors; The author must immediately inform the editorial staff if errors are found in the manuscript’s writing, both the review and the edit. These typographical errors include writing names, affiliations/agencies, quotations, and other writings to reduce the manuscript’s meaning and substance. If this happens, the writer must immediately propose improvements to the manuscript.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; the author must understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the manuscript can be processed smoothly and safely.

 Ethics of the Editor

  1. Publication decisions; The editor must ensure that the manuscript review process is thorough, transparent, objective, fair, and wise. The process becomes the basis for the editor in making decisions on a manuscript, whether it is rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as a script selection team.
  2. Publication information; editors must ensure that writers and other interested parties can access the scriptwriting guidelines and read clearly, both in printed and electronic versions.
  3. Distribution of peer-reviewed manuscripts; The editor must ensure the reviewer and the manuscript material for review and inform the reviewer’s provisions and manuscript review process.
  4. Objectivity and neutrality; editors must be objective, neutral, and honest in editing the manuscript, regardless of the author’s gender, ethnicity, religion, race, class, and nationality.
  5. Confidentiality; editors must maintain every information properly, primarily related to the author’s privacy and manuscript distribution.
  6. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; editors must understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.

Ethics of the Reviewer

  1. Objectivity and neutrality; reviewer, must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only side with scientific truth. Reviewing the manuscript was carried out professionally without distinguishing gender, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and nationality.
  2. Clarity of reference sources; reviewer must ensure that the reference source/manuscript citation is appropriate and credible. Suppose errors or irregularities are found in the writing of the reference/citation source. In that case, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor to make corrections by the author according to the reviewer’s note.
  3. Effectiveness of peer-reviews; reviewers must respond to the manuscript that has been sent by the editor and work under the predetermined time for peer-reviewing (maximum two weeks). If one needs additional time in the manuscript review, one must immediately report (confirmation) to the editorial secretariat.
  4. Disclosure of conflicts of interest; reviewers must understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.

Ethics of Journal Management

  1. Decision-making; The journal manager / editorial board must describe the organization’s mission and objectives, especially those related to policymaking and journal publishing decisions, without any particular interest.
  2. Freedom; Journal managers must give reviewers and editors freedom to create a comfortable working atmosphere and respect the author’s privacy.
  3. Guarantee and promotion; Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright) and be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. Also, journal managers must publish and promote published results to the public by guaranteeing the manuscript’s benefits.

Disclosure of conflicts of interest; Journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publication above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the manuscript publishing process runs smoothly and safely.