Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
The Journal of Computers and Technology (JUKOTI) aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies focusing on computer science and related topics that have not been published elsewhere in any language and are not under review for publication elsewhere. The following statement outlines the ethical behavior of all parties involved in publishing in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, PT. Zakir Berkah Media.
Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate account of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Manuscripts 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 must adhere to the journal submission guidelines.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works. Manuscripts should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous works and publications, both by other researchers and the authors, should be properly acknowledged and cited. Primary literature should be cited where possible. Original words taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Generally, an author should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that authors 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 clearly identified, and the primary publication should be referenced.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors, those who have made less substantial or purely technical contributions to the research or publication are acknowledged. Authors also ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscripts any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscripts. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted manuscript, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
Duties of Editors
Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The editor's decision should always be guided by the validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers. Editors may be guided by the journal’s editorial board policies and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors must take responsibility for everything they publish and have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
Manuscript Review: Editors should ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by an editor for originality. Editors 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. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
Fair Play: Editors must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc., of the authors. A key part of this responsibility is upholding the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions about publication, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
Confidentiality: Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring proper informed consent for the actual research presented and consent for publication where applicable.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.
Duties of Reviewers
Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should promptly notify the journal if they discover any deviations, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, notice substantial similarity between the manuscript and concurrent submission to another journal or published article, or suspect that misconduct might have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript; however, reviewers should keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal’s instructions on the specific feedback required of them and unless there are good reasons not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors to improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should identify further investigations that are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will strengthen or extend the work.
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 of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In cases of double-blind review, if reviewers suspect the author(s)' identity, they should notify the journal if this knowledge raises potential conflicts of interest.
Promptness: Reviewers should respond in a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts 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. If a reviewer feels it is not possible to complete the review of the manuscript within the stipulated time, then this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.
