Publication Ethics

This statement was adapted from the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and covered the code of ethics for the chief editor, editorial board members, reviewers, and authors. This statement is based on:

Articles published in the Soetomo Jurnal Pertanian AgroPro are an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge on food and fisheries technology, and those are a direct reflection of the writer's and institutions' quality. It is, therefore, essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher, and the society.  Editors of the Soetomo Jurnal Pertanian AgroPro are committed to guaranteeing that all procedures are directed merely to facilitate an objective and intellectual treatment. Further, the editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or particular political and group interest. Software used to avoid plagiarism among the articles.

Author Ethics

Reporting; the author must provide information about the process and the results of research to the editor in an honest, clear, and comprehensive, and keep the data research properly and safely.

Originality and plagiarism; The author must make sure that the manuscript that has been sent to the editor is original, written by himself, sourced from ideas and ideas, and not plagiarize the works or ideas of others. Authors are strictly prohibited from transferring the Sources available to anyone else's name. Please download, fill in, sign, and submit the results of the Ethical Statement and Copyright Transfer Agreement scanner when submitting this article.

Repetition of delivery; the author should mention the script sent/sent to the editor is a script that has never been delivered. If there is any redundancy in submitting the manuscript to another publication, then the editor will reject the submitted manuscript.
Author status; the author must submit to the editor that the author has the requirements in the field of expertise in accordance with the field of publications, namely librarianship. The author who subscribes the manuscript to the editor is the first author (co-author) if found problems in the process can be completed immediately.

An error of vegetable manuscript; the author should immediately find errors found in the discussion of the manuscript, both the results of reviews and edits. Errors are used to refer to names, affiliations, information, and other posts that may reduce the meaning and susceptibility of the manuscript. If that happens, the author should immediately announce the repair of the manuscript.

Disclosure of conflict of interest; writers must understand what is happening to others, allowing them to translate and help.

Editor Ethics 

Publication Decision; editors should make the review process thorough, transparent, objective, fair, and wise. It becomes the basis of the editor in making decisions of folders, rejected or accepted. In this case, the editorial board acts as a complete team of manuscripts.

Publication information; editors should ensure that you can use and use clear both printed and electronic information.

The distribution of peer-reviewed manuscripts; editors to review reviews and materials for reviews, and evaluation and review process.

Objectivity and neutrality; editors must be objective, neutral, and honest in understanding the manuscript, regardless of gender, the business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.
Confidentiality; editors should keep all information well, especially with the author's privacy and distribution of the manuscript.

Disclosure of conflict of interest; editors must understand the ethics of publications to avoid conflicts with others, making the process toward the script work smoothly and safely.

Review of Ethics 

Objectivity and neutrality; the reviewer must be honest, objective, unbiased, independent, and only in favor of scientific truth. The process of manipulation is done professionally regardless of gender, the business side, ethnicity, religion, race, inter-group, and author's citizenship.

Source clarity; the reviewer should ensure that the reference/quotation is appropriate and credible (accountable). If errors or irregularities are found in the use of reference/quotation sources, the reviewer should be promptly submitted to the editor for improvement by the author according to the reviewer's record.

Peer-reviewed effectiveness; reviewers have responded to the manuscript submitted by the editors and cooperated with the specified peer-review period (maximum 2 weeks). The time required in the review should immediately report (confirm) to the editorial secretariat.

Disclosure of conflict of interest; observers must understand the ethics of publications to avoid conflicts with others, making the process toward the manuscript run smoothly and safely.

Journal Manager Ethics

Decision-making; the manager of the journal/editorial board should describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to the determination of policy and decision of journal publishing without any particular interest.
Freedom; journal managers should give the reviewers and editors the freedom to create a comfortable working atmosphere and respect the privacy of the author.

Warranty and promotion; journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright), as well as be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. In addition, journal organizers should publish and promote the results of publications to the public by providing assurance of usefulness in the use of the manuscript.

Disclosure of conflict of interest; journal managers must understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid any conflict of interest with other parties, so the process of publishing the manuscript runs smoothly and safely.

Duties of Editors

  1. Publication Decisions: 

The editor boards journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. 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.

  1. Fair Play: 

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

  1. Confidentiality: 

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the paper (while handling it) in his or her research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or idea obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests revealed after publication.

  1. Review of Manuscripts:

The editor must ensure that the editor for originality initially evaluates each manuscript. The editor should organize and use peer review justly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

A reviewer should review and send the review comments in the due period. If the article is not in your area of interest, then revert to the editor so that the other reviewers can be approached.

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

  1. Promptness: 

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process

  1. Confidentiality: 

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

  1. Standards of Objectivity: 

Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

  1. Acknowledgment of Sources: 

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The proper citation should accompany any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for a particular advantage. Reviewers should not review 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.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standard: 

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

  1. Data Access and Retention: 

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.

  1. Originality and Plagiarism: 

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must appropriately be cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism, in all its forms, constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  1. Multiple Publication: 

An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

  1. Acknowledgment of Sources: 

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

  1. Authorship of the Paper: 

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

  1. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: 

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.

  1. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: 

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict 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.

  1. Fundamental errors in published works: 

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author should promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original article.