Publication Ethics

The Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Matematika dan Sains (JPPMS) is committed to maintaining high standards of integrity, transparency, accountability, fairness, confidentiality, editorial independence, and academic quality throughout the scholarly publishing process.

This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement establishes the ethical principles and responsibilities applicable to all parties involved in the publication process of JPPMS, including Authors, Editors, Reviewers, Editorial Board members, editorial staff, and the Publisher.

JPPMS upholds internationally recognized principles of ethical and transparent scholarly publishing, including guidance issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing developed collaboratively by COPE, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

This policy applies to all content submitted to or published by JPPMS, including research articles, regular issues, editorial notices, corrections, retractions, and other scholarly content published by the journal.

JPPMS upholds the following fundamental principles:

• Integrity, requiring honesty, accuracy, responsibility, and accountability throughout research, peer review, editorial decision-making, and publication.
• Fairness, requiring manuscripts, Authors, Reviewers, and ethical concerns to be assessed objectively, consistently, and impartially.
• Editorial Independence, requiring editorial decisions to remain free from inappropriate commercial, institutional, personal, financial, political, or other external influence.
• Transparency, requiring relevant editorial policies, procedures, declarations, corrections, and significant publication information to be communicated clearly.
• Confidentiality, requiring submitted manuscripts, peer-review materials, investigations, personal information, and other confidential information to be appropriately protected.
• Accountability, requiring Authors, Editors, Reviewers, editorial staff, and the Publisher to take responsibility for their respective roles in maintaining the integrity of scholarly communication.
• Accessibility, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity, requiring the journal to provide a scholarly publishing environment that avoids unnecessary or discriminatory barriers to participation and engagement.

Editorial decisions are based primarily on the scholarly merit, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and contribution of submitted work to mathematics and science education. They must not be influenced by an Author's personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, or other factors unrelated to the scholarly content of the manuscript.

Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's Publication Ethics, Author Guidelines, submission requirements, authorship requirements, or other editorial policies may be returned for clarification or correction, rejected, or otherwise handled in accordance with the applicable journal policy.

Authors are required to read and comply with this Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement and the related policies of the journal. By submitting a manuscript, Authors acknowledge their responsibility to ensure that the manuscript is original, accurately reported, appropriately cited, and compliant with applicable research ethics and publication requirements.

The manuscript similarity-check report, where used by the journal, serves as a screening tool to support editorial assessment. The similarity percentage does not automatically determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected. Interpretation of similarity results remains subject to editorial assessment, taking into account the source, nature, context, extent, distribution, and significance of the identified similarities.

 

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

Editors are responsible for determining whether manuscripts submitted to JPPMS are suitable for publication.

Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, originality, relevance to the journal's Focus and Scope, methodological soundness, clarity, scholarly contribution, peer-review reports, ethical considerations, research integrity, and compliance with the journal's policies.

Editors may consult other Editors, independent Reviewers, Editorial Board members, subject experts, statisticians, research integrity experts, ethics experts, or other appropriate specialists when additional expertise is required.

The journal's peer-review model, Reviewer responsibilities, confidentiality procedures, editorial decision-making, and related processes are described in the Peer Review Process.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must remain independent of inappropriate influence from the Publisher, journal owner, sponsor, institution, commercial entity, Author, or any other third party.

Decisions to accept, reject, request revision, correct, issue an Expression of Concern, retract, remove, replace, or otherwise act upon scholarly content must be based on academic quality, available evidence, ethical considerations, peer-review results where applicable, editorial assessment, and protection of the scholarly record.

Publication charges, administrative charges, production charges, waiver requests, withdrawal-related charges, advertising, sponsorship, or any other financial or commercial matter must not influence editorial decisions.

Further provisions should be provided in the journal's Editorial Independence Statement, where applicable.

Fair and Non-Discriminatory Evaluation

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual and scholarly content without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, political views, citizenship, institutional affiliation, personal relationships, financial circumstances, payment status, or other considerations unrelated to scholarly merit.

JPPMS aims to maintain a fair and inclusive publishing environment in which manuscripts are evaluated according to consistent academic and editorial standards.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts and related materials as confidential.

Information concerning a submission must not be disclosed to unauthorized persons.

Submitted manuscripts, Reviewer reports, Author responses, research data, figures, supplementary materials, investigation records, and confidential editorial communications must not be disclosed or shared outside the authorized editorial, peer-review, research-integrity, or journal-controlled process.

Use of Generative AI in Editorial Processes

Editors and editorial staff may use generative AI, AI-assisted technologies, or language-support tools for supportive and non-decisional purposes where such use is permitted by the journal's applicable policies.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must not replace human scholarly assessment, ethical judgment, research-integrity assessment, evaluation of Reviewer recommendations, Conflict of Interest assessment, or editorial decision-making.

The Editor remains responsible for editorial assessments, communications, recommendations, and final decisions.

Confidential manuscripts, Reviewer reports, Author responses, research data, figures, supplementary materials, editorial records, and private editorial communications must not be uploaded to public, unsecured, or unauthorized AI systems.

Where AI-assisted technologies are permitted, appropriate safeguards for confidentiality, privacy, data protection, and intellectual property must be maintained.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage any financial, personal, academic, institutional, competitive, collaborative, commercial, political, or other relationship that could reasonably be perceived as affecting their impartiality.

An Editor must not handle a manuscript or ethical case where an unmanaged Conflict of Interest exists. Such matters must be reassigned to another qualified Editor who is free from the relevant conflict.

If the Editor-in-Chief has a Conflict of Interest, the manuscript or case should be handled by another appropriate Editor or independent Editorial Board member.

Detailed provisions should be provided in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy, where applicable.

Complaints and Appeals

JPPMS should provide an appropriate mechanism for handling complaints and appeals concerning editorial procedures, editorial decisions, Editors, Reviewers, Editorial Board members, editorial staff, peer review, publication ethics, Conflicts of Interest, research integrity, or other matters directly related to the journal's publication activities.

Complaints and appeals should normally be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office and should provide sufficient information to identify the issue and enable the journal to assess it fairly.

Anonymous or confidential concerns may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific, credible, and relevant information or supporting evidence. The journal should assess concerns primarily according to their substance and available evidence rather than solely according to the identity of the complainant.

A person who is the subject of a complaint must not determine the outcome of that complaint. Where a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, Publisher, Editor, or Reviewer, the case should be handled by another appropriate and sufficiently independent person.

Appeals against editorial decisions should identify a material procedural error, factual misunderstanding, unmanaged Conflict of Interest, or other substantial issue that may reasonably have affected the decision. Disagreement with Reviewer comments or editorial judgment alone does not necessarily constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

After an appeal has been appropriately assessed, the journal's decision will normally be considered final unless significant new evidence or information becomes available.

Abusive, threatening, harassing, or intimidating communication must not influence editorial decisions. The journal may take appropriate measures to protect Editors, Reviewers, editorial staff, and other parties while ensuring that legitimate ethical or scholarly concerns are considered.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists Editors in making editorial decisions and may help Authors improve the quality, clarity, validity, and scholarly contribution of their manuscripts.

Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, objective, respectful, timely, and evidence-based assessments.

Promptness and Competence

An invited Reviewer who believes that they do not have appropriate expertise, cannot conduct an impartial review, has a relevant Conflict of Interest, or cannot complete the review within a reasonable period should promptly inform the Editor and decline the invitation.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, shared with, or discussed with any unauthorized person.

Reviewers must not use unpublished materials, ideas, data, methods, arguments, or findings obtained through peer review for their own research, publication, teaching, personal advantage, or the advantage of another party.

Use of Generative AI in Peer Review

Reviewers must protect the confidentiality and integrity of the peer-review process when using any digital or AI-assisted tools.

Confidential manuscripts, figures, tables, research data, supplementary files, Reviewer forms, Author responses, and other confidential peer-review materials must not be uploaded to public, unsecured, or unauthorized AI systems.

Any use of generative AI in peer review must comply with the journal's applicable policies and must not replace the Reviewer's own scholarly judgment, critical assessment, or ethical responsibility.

Reviewer Identity and Delegation

Reviewers must not delegate an assigned review to another person without prior permission from the Editor.

If another qualified person is permitted to contribute to a review, that person must comply with the journal's confidentiality, Conflict of Interest, and publication ethics requirements. Their contribution should be disclosed to the Editor where appropriate.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must focus on the scholarly content of the manuscript. Personal criticism of Authors is inappropriate.

Reviewers should express their assessments clearly and, where possible, support substantive criticisms or recommendations with appropriate reasoning or evidence.

Acknowledgement of Sources and Citation Ethics

Reviewers should identify relevant scholarly work that may have been overlooked where such work is genuinely relevant to the evaluation of the manuscript.

Reviewers must not request or recommend citations primarily to increase citations to themselves, colleagues, the journal, an institution, or another publication. Citation recommendations must be based on legitimate scholarly relevance.

Reviewers should inform the Editor of substantial overlap, redundant publication, plagiarism, citation manipulation, or other potential ethical issues identified during review.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose potential Conflicts of Interest arising from personal, academic, financial, institutional, competitive, collaborative, commercial, political, or other relevant relationships.

Reviewers should decline or discontinue the review where a Conflict of Interest could reasonably compromise, or appear to compromise, impartial assessment.

Detailed provisions should be provided in the journal's Conflict of Interest Policy, where applicable.

 

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards and Accuracy

Authors must present an accurate and honest account of the work performed and provide sufficient information to enable readers and Reviewers to understand, evaluate, and, where appropriate, reproduce or replicate the research.

Data, methods, analyses, results, figures, tables, references, and other research information must be reported accurately and must not be fabricated, falsified, manipulated, selectively misrepresented, or knowingly misleading.

Originality, Plagiarism, and Similarity

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work.

Where words, ideas, data, methods, instruments, figures, tables, or other materials originating from another source are used, they must be appropriately cited, quoted, acknowledged, licensed, or otherwise used with permission where required.

Plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, citation manipulation, or other misleading use of previously published material is unacceptable.

Similarity-checking results, where used, must not be interpreted solely on the basis of a numerical similarity percentage. Editorial assessment considers the source, context, nature, extent, and significance of identified similarities.

Multiple, Redundant, and Concurrent Submission

Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.

Redundant or overlapping publication must be disclosed and appropriately justified. Relevant previous or related publications must be transparently cited.

Acknowledgement of Sources and Citation Ethics

Authors must appropriately acknowledge sources that materially contributed to the development, methodology, interpretation, or context of the research.

Authors must not manipulate citations, include irrelevant citations for the purpose of increasing citation counts, intentionally omit materially relevant sources in a misleading manner, participate in citation cartels, or engage in coercive citation practices.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must reflect substantive scholarly contribution and requires responsibility and accountability for the published work.

All listed Authors must have made an appropriate contribution to the research, approved the submitted manuscript, and agreed to its submission to JPPMS.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged where applicable.

Requests concerning addition, removal, rearrangement, contribution, correspondence, or other authorship changes must be communicated to the editorial team and handled in accordance with the journal's applicable procedures.

The journal should not independently adjudicate private authorship disputes that properly require resolution by the Authors and/or their institutions.

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Authors may use generative AI, AI-assisted technologies, language-support tools, or other assistive technologies in preparing manuscripts, provided that their use complies with the journal's applicable policies.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, ethical compliance, verification, and final content of their manuscripts. AI-assisted technologies must not replace the Authors' own scholarly contribution, critical reasoning, analysis, interpretation, discussion, or conclusions.

Use of such technologies must be disclosed where required by the journal.

Generative AI systems and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as Authors or co-authors because authorship requires human responsibility and accountability for the integrity of the work.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose relevant financial, personal, academic, institutional, political, commercial, professional, or other interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research, interpretation, writing, review, or publication of the manuscript.

Sources of funding, grants, sponsorship, institutional support, or other material support relevant to the research must be disclosed as required by the journal.

Data Availability and Reproducibility

Authors are responsible for maintaining accurate records of the data, materials, instruments, methods, procedures, and analyses underlying their work.

Where appropriate and ethically permissible, the journal may request supporting data, research materials, analysis files, or other documentation for editorial assessment, verification, correction, or research-integrity investigation.

Data sharing must comply with applicable ethical, legal, privacy, confidentiality, security, institutional, and funder requirements.

Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, students, teachers, schools, educational institutions, vulnerable populations, personal or sensitive data, or other activities requiring ethical oversight must comply with applicable ethical and legal standards.

Where required, Authors must obtain and disclose relevant ethics approval, informed consent, institutional permission, research permits, consent for publication, or other appropriate documentation.

Privacy, confidentiality, personal data, images, identities, and the rights and welfare of research participants must be appropriately protected, particularly in research involving students, children, teachers, and educational institutions.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When Authors discover a significant error, inaccuracy, ethical issue, or other material concern in their published work, they must promptly inform the Editorial Office and cooperate with the journal in determining the appropriate action to protect the scholarly record.

 

Research Misconduct

JPPMS takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously.

Research or publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, data or image manipulation, unethical authorship practices, undisclosed Conflicts of Interest, redundant publication, duplicate submission, and other serious violations of research or publication ethics.

Concerns may arise before or after publication and may be reported by Authors, readers, Reviewers, Editors, institutions, or other parties.

Anonymous or confidential allegations may be assessed where they contain sufficiently specific, credible, and relevant information.

Depending on the nature of the case, the journal may conduct a preliminary assessment, request clarification or supporting documentation, seek independent expert opinion, examine relevant evidence, communicate with Authors, and, where appropriate, contact an institution, research ethics committee, funder, research integrity body, or another relevant authority.

The editorial or publication process may be suspended while a serious ethical or research-integrity concern is being assessed.

Depending on the findings and publication status of the manuscript or article, appropriate action may include rejection, withdrawal, correction, erratum, corrigendum, Expression of Concern, retraction, article removal, article replacement, or referral to an appropriate institution or authority.

 

Post-Publication Updates and Scholarly Discussion

JPPMS is committed to preserving the accuracy, transparency, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record after publication.

Where an editorially significant error or integrity issue is identified, appropriate action may include a Correction, Erratum, Corrigendum, Expression of Concern, Retraction, Article Removal, or Article Replacement, depending on the nature, severity, origin, and impact of the issue.

Editorially significant post-publication actions should be documented transparently. Where appropriate, a separate editorial notice may be published and linked to the original article.

The original article and relevant post-publication update should be maintained and linked in accordance with the journal's applicable policies and scholarly-record requirements.

Comments and Criticism

JPPMS supports responsible post-publication scholarly discussion concerning research published in the journal.

Such contributions may address methodology, analysis, interpretation, theoretical considerations, limitations, reproducibility, clarification, or other scholarly matters concerning a published article.

Where appropriate, Authors of the original article may be invited to provide a response.

Allegations of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, peer-review manipulation, authorship misconduct, or other serious ethical violations should normally be reported confidentially to the Editorial Office for preliminary assessment rather than presented as established facts in a public scholarly comment.

 

Intellectual Property, Copyright, Licensing, and Open Access

Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher must respect copyright, intellectual property rights, licensing conditions, permissions, and proper attribution of third-party materials.

Copyright ownership, Author rights, licensing terms, Open Access conditions, permitted reuse, and repository or self-archiving provisions should be described transparently in the journal's applicable policies.

The applicable copyright holder and licensing terms must be clearly identified in published content in accordance with the journal's policy.

 

Responsibilities of the Publisher

The Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, as the publisher of JPPMS, is responsible for supporting an editorially independent, transparent, reliable, and sustainable scholarly publishing environment.

The Publisher shall:

• respect the editorial independence of the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Team;
• not improperly interfere with individual manuscript decisions;
• support appropriate infrastructure for manuscript management, publication, metadata registration, preservation, and access;
• support Editors in handling serious ethical, legal, publication-integrity, or research-integrity concerns;
• ensure that publication fees, revenue considerations, sponsorship, advertising, or other commercial matters do not determine editorial outcomes;
• support appropriate corrections and other actions necessary to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record;
• maintain or support appropriate digital preservation and archiving arrangements;
• disclose ownership and management information transparently; and
• periodically review journal policies and publishing practices in response to developments in scholarly publishing standards and applicable requirements.

 

Publication Fees and Commercial Practices

Publication fees, administrative charges, waivers, withdrawal-related charges, post-publication administrative charges, or other financial matters must not influence peer-review outcomes, editorial decisions, ethical assessments, or actions required to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal's business model, applicable publication charges, exemptions or waivers, relevant revenue sources, advertising practices, and direct marketing provisions should be described transparently in the journal's applicable policies.

Advertising, sponsorship, marketing activities, revenue considerations, or other commercial interests must remain separate from editorial decision-making.

Direct marketing and manuscript solicitation conducted on behalf of JPPMS must be appropriate, professional, and based on accurate information about the journal, its Publisher, accreditation status, scope, editorial processes, and publication practices.

Direct marketing must not include misleading claims, guaranteed acceptance, guaranteed publication, misleading accreditation claims, or other statements that could compromise editorial independence or scholarly publishing integrity.

 

Policy Review

JPPMS periodically reviews this Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement and related editorial policies to maintain consistency with relevant publication ethics standards, scholarly publishing best practices, technological developments, legal or regulatory requirements, and the operational needs of the journal.

In particular, JPPMS may review and revise its policies in response to developments in guidance or standards issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Crossref/Crossmark, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and other relevant scholarly publishing organizations or authorities.

Where a situation is not specifically addressed by an existing journal policy, the Editor and Publisher may exercise professional editorial judgment while considering appropriate external guidance, available evidence, independent expert opinion where necessary, and the principles of fairness, transparency, proportionality, confidentiality, editorial independence, and protection of the scholarly record.

Until a revised policy is formally adopted, the current approved version remains applicable.