Untuk mendapatkan layanan dalam  bahasa Indonesia  silahkan klik disini 

To maintain the quality of the manuscript and avoid publishing violations plagiarism in the publishing process, the editorial board established the ethics of publication of the Psyche165 journal. The ethical rules in this publication apply to writers/authors, editors, partners/reviewers, and managers of journals/editors.  The ethics of this publication are based on COPE (Committee On Publication Ethics) standards 

 Statement of Ethics and Malpractice Publication

 Author's Duties

 1 Reporting Standards: The

author of the original research report must present an accurate report of the work carried out as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be represented accurately in the paper. A paper must contain enough details and references to enable others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

  1. Data Retention and Access: The

the author is asked to provide raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and must be prepared to provide public access to the data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Database), if possible, and should be in the event any. be prepared to save the data for a reasonable time after publication.

  1. Originality and Plagiarism:

Writers must ensure that they have written an entirely original work, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others who have been quoted or cited appropriately.

  1. Multiple, Excessive, or Concurrent Publications:

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts that explain the same research in more than one major journal or publication. Sending the same text to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.

  1. Recognition of Resources:

Appropriate recognition of the work of others must always be given. Authors must cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported.

  1. Author of the Paper:

The essay must be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research reported. All people who have made significant contributions must be registered as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or registered as contributors. The appropriate author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all the co-authors have seen and agreed to the final version of this paper and have approved their submission for publication.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

All authors must disclose in their text any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be interpreted to affect the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

  1. Fundamental errors in published works:

When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, the author must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

  1. Dangers and Subjects of Humans or Animals:

If work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify this in the text.

 

Editor's Duties

  1. Fair play:

Editors at all times evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author.

  1. Confidentiality:

Editors and editorial staff may not disclose any information about the manuscript sent to anyone other than the author, reviewer, potential reviewer, other editorial advisers, and appropriate publishers, as appropriate.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

Unpublished material that is disclosed in the manuscript submitted may not be used in the editor's research without the written consent of the author.

  1. Publication Decision:

The editorial journal is responsible for deciding which articles to submit to the journal that must be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always encourage such decisions. The editors can be guided by the policies of the journal editorial board and are limited by legal requirements such as those currently in force relating to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors can negotiate with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

  1. Manuscript Review: The

the editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must organize and use peer reviews fairly and wisely. Editors must explain their peer review process in information for the authors and also indicate which parts of the peer-reviewed journal. Editors must use peer reviewers who are appropriate for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those who have conflicts of interest.

 

Review Task

  1. Contributions to Editorial Decisions:

Peer reviews help the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communication with the author can also assist the writer in improving the paper.

  1. Speed:

Any selected referee who feels ineligible to review the research reported in the text or knows that the quick review is not possible must inform the editor and excuse himself or herself from the review process.

  1. Objectivity Standards:

Reviews must be carried out objectively. Personal criticism from the writer is not right. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

  1. Confidentiality:

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

Information or special ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or relationships with one of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the paper.

  1. Recognition of Resources: The

the reviewer must identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that observations, derivations, or arguments have been reported before must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must also call for the attention of the editor if there is a substantial or overlap between the manuscript being considered and other published papers which have personal knowledge.