In general, the ethics of publication JIM (Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen) refers to COPE.
Statement scientific code of conduct is an expression of the code of conduct of all parties involved in the process of scientific journal publications, namely managers, editors, bestari partners, and author / writer. The statement's code of ethics of scientific publications by LIPI Chief Regulation No. 5 of 2014 on the Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications, which basically Scientific Publication Ethics Code is essentially upholds ethical values in three publications, namely
- Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in the management of the publication;
- Justice, which gives the right to authorship entitled as author / writer; and
- Honesty, which is free of duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in the publication.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR THE EDITOR
1. Decisions Publications
JIM (Jurnal Ilmu Manajemen) Editor is responsible for deciding which articles will be published on the articles received. This decision was based on the validation of an article and the article contributions for researchers and readers. In doing so, Editor guided by the policy of the editorial board and is subject to the laws need to be enforced as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors can discuss with other editors or reviewers in making the decision.
2. Assessment Objective
Editor conduct an evaluation of a script based on the intellectual content without discrimination of religion, ethnicity, race, gender, race, and others.
Editors and editorial staff can not disclose any information about the manuscript that has been accepted to anyone, other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the editorial board.
4. Conflicts of Interest
The material sent to the accrual article has not been published and may not be used for personal research include the editor without the written permission of the author. Information or ideas obtained through a double blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors should refuse to review the manuscript if the editor has a conflict of interest, which is due to the competitive relationship, collaborative, or other relationships with the author, company, or institution related to the manuscript.
5. Cooperation in the Investigation
Editors must take responsive measures if there are complaints related to ethics on a manuscript that has been received or the articles that have been published. Editors can contact the author of the script and give due consideration to the complaint. Editors can also communicate more to institutions or agencies related research. When the complaint has been resolved, matters such as the publication of a correction, withdrawal, expression of concern, or other records, should be considered to be done.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR THE REVIEWER
1. Contributions to the Decision Editor
Blind peer review by the reviewer assist editors in making decisions and can assist the author in improving writing through editorial communication between the reviewer with the author. Peer review is an important component in the formal scientific communication ( formal scholarly communication ) and a scientific approach.
If the reviewer is assigned feel qualified to conduct a review of a manuscript or knows that it is impossible to conduct a review in a timely manner, the reviewer assigned must immediately notify the editor.
Each manuscript has been accepted for review must be treated as confidential documents. Tesebut manuscript should not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Critics of a personal nature on the author is not appropriate. Reviewers should be clearly expressed his views along with the arguments in favor.
5. Completeness and Authenticity References
Reviewers should identify works of publications that have not been cited by the author. A statement of observations or arguments previously published should be accompanied by relevant quotes. Reviewers must notify the editor on substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript was in-review with other writings that have been published, in accordance with the knowledge reviewer.
6. Conflicts of Interest
Articles unpublished material should not be used in personal research reviewer without including the written permission of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should reject the manuscript review if the reviewer has a conflict of interest, which is due to the competitive relationship, collaborative, or other relationships with the author, company, or institution related to the work.
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS
1. Standard Writing
Authors must present papers / articles are accurate to the research conducted as well as presenting an objective discussion on the significance of the research. The research data must be presented accurately in the article. An article should be sufficiently detailed with adequate reference to enable others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or inaccurate presentation of papers that constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Data Access Research
Authors may be asked to provide raw data on paper to be reviewed and should be able to provide public access to such data if possible, and should be able to store the data in a reasonable period of time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism in all forms constitute unethical behavior in the publication of scientific works and unacceptable. Authors must ensure that all work presented an original work, and if the authors have used the work and / or words of others, the writer must present the appropriate citations. There are various forms of plagiarism, as acknowledging the writings of others into writing your own, copy or rewrite substantial parts of the works of others without citing sources, as well as claiming the results of research conducted by others. Self-Plagiarism or bibs plagiarism is a form of plagiarism. Oto plagiarism is cite or sentences of his own works were published without citing sources.
4. Terms of Delivery Posts
The author may not publish the same script on more than one journal. Asking the same script on more than one journal is a publication of unethical behavior in scientific papers and unacceptable.
5. Inclusion Reference Source
Recognition correctly on the work of others must always be done. Authors must mention influential publications in the preparation of his work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, may not be used or reported without written permission from the source of the information.
The author is a person who has contributed sigifikan to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the writing in the article. All the parties who have made significant contributions listed as co-author . Authors of correspondence should ensure that all co-authors have included in the script, and all the co-authors have read and approved the final version of the work, and has approved the submission of the manuscript for publication.
7. Error in writing Posted
When the authors found a significant error or inaccuracy in his work have been published, the author is responsible to promptly notify the journal editor, as well as working with the editor to retract or correct the text. If the editor to obtain information from third parties that a work containing kesalahaan significant publication, the author bears responsibility to immediately withdraw or make corrections to the text editor or give evidence related to the accuracy of the original writings.