PUBLICATION ETHICS

Journal of Regional and Disaster Studies is a journal that aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and an authoritative source of information. We publish scientific papers on cultural studies, social change, and related topics that have neither been published elsewhere in any language nor are they under review for publication anywhere. The following statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines.

 

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research, writing an article by authors, or reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles published in scientific journals, editors are responsible for ensuring the scientific record's accuracy and integrity.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them in resolving the complaint and addressing the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to have such misconduct, a retraction can be published and linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the allegation's validity and assessing whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or other substantial research irregularities is possible, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all co-authors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article, are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an essential obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Journal of Regional and Disaster Studies: Kajian Ilmu Budaya dan Perubahan Sosial will continue to fulfil the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Complaints and Appeals

Journal of Regional and Disaster Studies will have a straightforward procedure for handling complaints against the Journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to the respected person concerning the case of the complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guidelines.

Ethical Oversight

Suppose the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use. In that case, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript to obey ethical research conduct using animals and human subjects. Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization if required.

If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors should justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed and objectively discuss its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
  2. Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure they have written original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications should be properly acknowledged and referenced by other researchers and the author's own. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
  4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: The author should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. The author is also expected not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in multiple journals. Submitting the same manuscript to numerous journals concurrently constitutes unacceptable publishing behaviour. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be identified as such, and the primary publication should be referenced
  5. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given.
  6. Authorship and Contributorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors in cases where major contributors are listed as authors, while those who made less substantial or purely technical contributions to the research or the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and indicate which journal parts are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
  3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc., of the authors. An essential part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is upholding the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position to make decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented and consent for publication where applicable.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The journal's editor will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his research without the author's written consent. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  2. 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.
  3. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
  4. Standards of Objectivity: The submitted manuscript review must be done objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journals' instructions on the specific feedback required unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will strengthen or extend the work
  5. 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 with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the author's identity (s), notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
  6. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly 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 they cannot complete the manuscript review within the stipulated time, this information must be communicated to the editor so the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)

The author (s) warrant that their manuscript is their original work that has not been published before; that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; and that its publication has been approved by all co-authors, if any, as well as tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities at the institution where the work was carried out. The author (s) affirm that the article contains no unfounded or unlawful statements and does not violate the rights of others. If copyrighted works are included, the author (s) are responsible for obtaining written permission from the copyright owners. The Corresponding author, as the signing author, warrants that they have full power to make this grant on behalf of the author (s).

By signing this agreement, the Corresponding author grants to the publisher the following rights to the manuscript, including any supplemental material and any parts, extracts or elements thereof:

  • the right to reproduce and distribute the manuscript in printed form, including print-on-demand;
  • the right to produce prepublications, reprints, and special editions of the manuscript;
  • the right to translate the manuscript into other languages;
  • the right to reproduce the manuscript using photomechanical or similar means including, but not limited to, photocopy, and the right to distribute these reproductions;
  • the right to reproduce and distribute the manuscript electronically or optically on any data carriers or storage media – especially in machine readable/digitalized form on data carriers such as hard drive, CD-ROM, DVD, Blu-ray Disc (BD), Mini-Disk, data tape – and the right to reproduce and distribute the article via these data carriers;
  • the right to store the manuscript in databases, including online databases, and the right to transmission the manuscript in all technical systems and modes;
  • the right to make the manuscript available to the public or closed user groups on individual demand, for use on monitors or other readers (including e-books), and in printable form for the user, either via the internet, other online services, or via internal or external networks.

 

Articles published in the Journal are Open-Access articles distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The journal allows the author (s) to deposit Author's Post-print (accepted version) and publisher's version/PDF in an institutional repository and non-commercial subject-based repositories, such as PubMed Central, Europe PMC, arXiv, DOAJ, ERIC, and other repositories, or to publish it on author's personal website and departmental website (including social networking sites, such as ResearchGate, Academia.edu, etc.), at any time after publication. Publisher copyright and source must be acknowledged, and a link must be made to the article's DOI.

Upon receiving the proofs, the author (s) agree to promptly check the evidence carefully, correct any typographical errors, and authorize the publication of the corrected proofs.

The Corresponding author agrees to inform their co-authors of any of the above terms. 

Peer-Review Process Policy

Reviewing process will consider novelty, objectivity, method, scientific impact, conclusion, and references. Reviewers' comments will be sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses. Editorial Board will evaluate the reviewer's comment and then send the final decision regarding the submission to the corresponding author based on the reviewer's recommendation. 

Plagiarism Screening Policy

Journal of Regional and Disaster Studies will immediately investigate and reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism. JRDS Editorial Board will ensure that every published article will not exceed the 20% similarity Score. 

 

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Journal of Regional and Disaster Studies accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by the reader. In case the reader gives discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.

 

Article Withdrawal Policy

Standards for dealing with article withdrawal, article retraction, article removal, and article replacement on JRDS Policy: 

It is a general principle of scholarly communication that the editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published. In making this decision, the editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.  An outcome of this principle is the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historical record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as possible. However, occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or removed. Such actions must not be undertaken lightly and can only occur under exceptional circumstances. In all cases, our official archives at the National Library of the Netherlands will retain all article versions, including retracted or otherwise removed articles.

This policy has been designed to address these concerns and consider current best practices in the scholarly and library communities.  As standards evolve and change, we will revisit this issue and welcome the input of scholarly and library communities. We believe these issues require international standards, and we will actively lobby various information bodies to establish international standards and best practices that the publishing and information industries can adopt.  See also the National Library of Medicine's policy on retractions and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommendations concerning corrections and retractions.

Article Withdrawal

Only used for Articles in Press representing early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional, ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Articles in Press (articles that have been accepted for publication but which have not been formally published and will not yet have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article(s), or are determined to violate our Journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), maybe "Withdrawn" from JRDS Archive. Withdrawn means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is removed and replaced with a HTML page and PDF stating that the article has been withdrawn according to the JRDS Policy on Article in Press Withdrawal with a link to the current policy document.

Article Retraction

Infringements of professional, ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the editor under the advice of members of the scholarly community has long been an occasional feature of the learned world. Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by several library and scholarly bodies, and this best practice is adopted for article retraction by JRDS:

  • A retraction note titled "Retraction: [article title]" signed by the authors and/or the editor is published in the paginated part of a subsequent journal issue and listed in the contents list.
  • In the electronic version, a link is made to the original article.
  • The online article is preceded by a screen containing the retraction note. It is to this screen that the link resolves; the reader can then proceed to the article itself.
  • The original article is retained unchanged save for a watermark on the .pdf indicating on each page that it is "retracted."
  • The HTML version of the document is removed.

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction-guidelines-cope.pdf

Article removal: legal limitations

Removing an article from the online database may be necessary in a few cases. This will only occur where the article is defamatory or infringes others' legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk. While the metadata (Title and Authors) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating the article has been removed for legal reasons.

Article replacement

In cases where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk, the original article's authors may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. In these circumstances, the procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the database retraction notice will publish a link to the corrected re-published article and a history of the document.