Ethics of Scientific Publication

Ethics of Scientific Publication

The RANDOM Journal is a special journal for community service (abmas) managed by the Indramayu State Polytechnic. The NADIMAS Journal is published twice a year, namely in March and October. This journal follows guidelines based on the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publication sourced from COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

Journal Publication Ethics Guidelines

Scientific publication of an article is the result of the thoughts of a person or group of people, after going through scientific review, disseminated in the form of scientific papers, including journals, books, proceedings, research reports, scientific papers and posters. The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publication upholds three ethical values in publication, namely (i) Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in managing publications; (ii) Neutrality, which is giving authorship rights to those entitled as authors; and (iii) Honesty, which is free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publication.

The Community Service Center of the Indramayu State Polytechnic (Polindra) as the publisher of the RANDOM Journal carries out the task of monitoring all stages of publication carefully. In addition, the PPI and the Editorial Board will assist in communicating with other journals and/or publishers if this is useful and necessary.

Code of Ethics for Editors

The RANDOM Journal Editorial Team determines the publication process and integrates the functions of authors, peer reviewers, and journal managers to publish written works based on scientific and ethical principles. The editors respond to criticism, suggestions, and objections from authors honestly and transparently. The editors' task is also to maintain the independence of the journal from purely commercial considerations and to strive for the journal to remain a top-class journal in its field. The editors work based on the following principles and ethical standards:

Responsible for the selection of journal content and strive to continuously improve the quality of publications.
Obliged to create writing guidelines for authors and their templates.
Critically assess that the written work is free from ethical violations, honest and objective, independent, assessing each on quality without looking at the author's nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation, and free from prejudice in making decisions including in choosing peer reviewers.
Ensure that the written work review process is carried out comprehensively, transparently, objectively and fairly.
Ensure that all published papers have been reviewed by qualified peer reviewers.
Ensure the eligibility of the selected peer reviewers according to their competencies. The selected peer reviewers are those who can consider the paper and do not have a conflict of interest.
Reject papers without review if they are not in accordance with the scope of the journal or are of low quality, but not because of the background of the author or their affiliated institution.
Strive to ensure that published research complies with the guidelines for the code of ethics for scientific publication issued by LIPI and relevant international guidelines.
Provide a form to be signed by the author regarding the ethical statement (ethical clearance) and copyright agreement.

Code of Ethics for Reviewers

A reviewer is someone who helps the editors to critically review the substance of scientific papers according to their field of expertise, so that reviewers play a very important role in the scientific publication process. Reviewers work based on the following principles and ethical standards:

Required to be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only side with scientific truth.
Must be critical in assessing the contents of a paper according to their field of expertise, be open about new things, keep things being assessed confidential, and not take personal advantage of the paper being assessed, and have the spirit to improve the paper that has been reviewed.
Have the task of assisting the editors in determining which papers can be published and helping authors to improve the quality of their papers.
Required to always uphold the basic principles and scientific analysis in conducting the process of reviewing a paper.
The results of the review are conveyed honestly, objectively and supported by clear arguments. Some possible recommendations from the review results: (i) accepted without revision or accepted with minor revisions (after revisions by the author, no need to return to the peer reviewer), (ii) accepted with revisions (after revisions by the author, return to the peer reviewer for re-review), (iii) rejected and recommended for publication elsewhere as appropriate, (iv) rejected and recommended not to be published anywhere because the work is scientifically flawed or has a detrimental impact on users/the public.
Do not use the reviewed written work for personal or third party interests. The use of part of the contents of the reviewed written work has received permission from the author. The written work under review may not be disseminated.

Code of Ethics for Authors

A writer in a scientific journal is someone who pours out the results of his/her thoughts and/or research and development in the form of a written work that has met the requirements of scientific and ethical principles. Research is aimed at gaining new knowledge, adding to the scientific treasury beyond the limits of known knowledge, or producing a scientific solution method for the problems faced. The results of this process are the author's contribution as an individual in contributing to science. The author works based on the requirements of scientific principles and ethical standards as follows:

Make a statement that the written work submitted for publication is original, has never been published anywhere in any language, and is not in the process of being submitted to another publisher. If there is an error in the written work, the author immediately notifies the editor or publisher.
Ensure that the names listed as authors, including the order, are in accordance with the order of their contributions and are approved by all members. If there is a change, reduction, or addition of the author's name, it must first be agreed upon by the other authors. The author ensures that all parties who contribute non-substantively to the written work will be thanked.
Collectively responsible for the work and content of the article including methods, analysis, calculations and details.
Inform the editor if you will withdraw your paper.
Inform the editor about the paper which is part of a gradual, multidisciplinary and different perspective research.
If requested, the author prepares evidence that the research conducted has met the requirements of research ethics, including providing field notes or research log books. The author responds adequately if there are comments or responses after the paper is published.
Not involved in plagiarism or self-plagiarism, and salami publication is strictly prohibited in the RANDOM Journal.