Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Statement on Publication Malpractice

This statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in publishing articles in the Envisionary Journal, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher. These principles ensure the integrity and quality of the publication process.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal is a cornerstone of knowledge dissemination, reflecting the quality of work by authors and their supporting institutions. Peer-reviewed articles uphold the scientific method and require adherence to high ethical standards by authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and the academic community.

The Envisionary Journal takes its role seriously, ensuring that all publishing stages are handled ethically. We maintain editorial independence, unaffected by commercial influences, and facilitate transparent communication when collaboration with other journals or publishers is necessary.

Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief, supported by the editorial board and reviewers, determines which submitted articles merit publication. Decisions are based on quality, originality, and relevance while adhering to legal standards on libel, copyright, and plagiarism.

Non-Discrimination

Manuscripts are evaluated solely on intellectual merit, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political beliefs.

Confidentiality

Editors, reviewers, and staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential, sharing information only with relevant parties such as corresponding authors and editorial team members.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts must not be used by anyone involved in the editorial process for personal research. Conflicts of interest must be disclosed promptly to maintain transparency.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers play a vital role in advising the Editor-in-Chief and assisting authors in enhancing their manuscripts through constructive feedback. The journal employs a double-blind review process to ensure impartiality.

Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to provide feedback promptly. If delays are anticipated, reviewers should notify the editorial team immediately.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts under review are treated with the utmost confidentiality and should not be shared or discussed outside the editorial process.

Objectivity and Constructive Criticism

Reviews should focus on the manuscript’s content, providing unbiased and respectful feedback. Reviewers must justify their recommendations with clear, evidence-based arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify any relevant work not cited by the authors and notify the editor of any substantial similarity to other published works.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must avoid evaluating manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist, whether due to competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with authors or institutions.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors must present accurate and objective accounts of their research. Data should be represented clearly, and fraudulent or inaccurate statements are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be required to provide raw data for editorial review and must be prepared to share this data responsibly.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure their submissions are original, properly citing or quoting any work or ideas of others. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism will be rejected.

Multiple or Redundant Publication

Simultaneous submissions to multiple journals are unethical and unacceptable. Authors must confirm that their work is not under consideration elsewhere.

Authorship

Authorship should include only those who have significantly contributed to the research. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors are informed of the manuscript’s progress.

Ethical Compliance

If the research involves hazards, human participants, or animal subjects, authors must clearly disclose any risks and ethical considerations in the manuscript.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence their work and acknowledge all funding sources.

Addressing Errors

If an author identifies a significant error in their published work, they must notify the journal promptly to retract or correct the article.

Screening for Plagiarism

All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection tools to ensure originality and adherence to ethical standards.

Digital Archiving

The journal employs reliable digital archiving systems, such as Indonesia One Search (IOS) and Garuda, to preserve published content for future access and restoration.

Review Guidelines

Responsibility of Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers assess manuscripts within their area of expertise, providing constructive and honest feedback to improve the quality of submissions. Reviewers should:

  • Ensure the manuscript aligns with their expertise. If not, they should notify the editor promptly.

  • Complete the review process within the agreed timeline or request an extension if needed.

  • Disclose any conflicts of interest before reviewing.

Review Criteria

When evaluating manuscripts, reviewers should consider:

  • Title: Does it accurately reflect the content?

  • Abstract: Is it a concise summary of the article?

  • Introduction: Does it contextualize the research and state clear objectives?

  • Methodology: Is it robust, well-documented, and replicable?

  • Results: Are findings presented clearly and supported by appropriate analysis?

  • Discussion and Conclusion: Are claims supported by evidence, and do they contribute to the field?

  • References: Are all sources properly cited?

Ethical Considerations

Reviewers should report any suspected plagiarism or unethical practices to the editor. Privileged information from the review process must remain confidential.

Final Review Process

Reviewers provide recommendations to guide editorial decisions. Feedback should clearly indicate which comments are intended for the editor and which are for the authors.

For further questions or clarifications, reviewers and authors are encouraged to contact the editorial office.