The following statements describe ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article for Jurnal Farmaku, i.e.: the author, the editor, and the peer reviewer. Authors could refer to International Standards for Editors and Authors (http://publicationethics.org/) by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) for policies that are not stated in these instructions.

 

Duties of authors 
Publication Ethics for Authors:

1. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and does not involve any form of plagiarism. Proper credit should be given to the ideas, data, and works of others through appropriate citations and references.
2. Accurate Representation: Authors should accurately and honestly present the methods, results, and interpretation of their research. Manipulating data, images, or findings to present a false or misleading representation is unethical.
3. Authorship and Contribution: All individuals who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as authors. It is important to accurately attribute authorship and acknowledge the contributions of others who have participated in the research.
4. Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of their work. This includes financial, personal, or professional relationships that could be perceived as biasing the research.
5. Data Integrity: Authors must retain and provide access to the original data upon which their research is based. Data should be accurately reported, and any modifications or exclusions must be transparently explained.
6. Ethical Approval: If the research involves human subjects, animals, or other sensitive matters, authors should obtain appropriate ethical approvals and clearly indicate in the manuscript that such approvals were obtained.
7. Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should properly attribute the ideas, data, and works of others by citing relevant sources. Plagiarism, whether intentional or unintentional, is unacceptable.
8. Peer Review Process: Authors should engage constructively in the peer review process, responding to feedback and making necessary revisions to improve the quality of their work.
9. Multiple Submissions and Redundant Publication: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously, nor should they submit previously published work as original research.
10. Respect for Copyright: Authors should respect copyright laws and obtain necessary permissions for the use of copyrighted materials, such as images, figures, and text excerpts.
11. Corrections and Retractions: If errors or inaccuracies are discovered after publication, authors should promptly inform the journal's editors and work to correct the record. In cases of serious misconduct, authors should be willing to retract their work.
12. Compliance with Guidelines: Authors should adhere to the specific guidelines and requirements of the journal to which they are submitting their work. This includes formatting, word limits, and reference style.
13. Professional Conduct: Authors should conduct themselves professionally and respectfully in all interactions with editors, reviewers, and fellow researchers.

 

Duties of editors 
Publication Ethics for Editors:

1. Fair and Impartial Review: Editors have a responsibility to ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and free from bias. Manuscripts should be evaluated based on their scholarly merit and contribution to the field, regardless of the authors' identity, affiliation, or other personal factors.
2. Conflicts of Interest: Editors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could affect their judgment or decision-making regarding a submitted manuscript. If a conflict arises, the editor should recuse themselves from the handling of that manuscript.
3. Confidentiality: Editors and their editorial staff should maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and related materials. Manuscripts under review should not be shared or discussed with unauthorized individuals.
4. Timely Review Process: Editors should ensure that the peer review process is conducted in a timely manner. Authors should be provided with clear timelines for review, and any delays should be communicated transparently.
5. Peer Review Process: Editors should select appropriate and qualified peer reviewers who have relevant expertise in the subject matter of the manuscript. Reviewers' comments should be collected and provided to authors in a constructive and respectful manner.
6. Transparency and Communication: Editors should communicate clearly with authors about the review process, editorial decisions, and any revisions required. Constructive feedback should be provided to help authors improve their work.
7. Respect for Authorship: Editors should respect the intellectual property and authorship rights of the submitted work. Any changes to authorship or content should be made in consultation with the authors and based on valid reasons.
8. Ethical Concerns and Misconduct: Editors should handle cases of ethical misconduct, such as plagiarism, data manipulation, and fraudulent reporting, with utmost seriousness. Appropriate actions should be taken, including contacting the authors, conducting investigations, and involving relevant institutions if necessary.
9. Confidentiality Breach and Unpublished Information: Editors and reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal gain. Any insights gained through the review process should be treated confidentially.
10. Editorial Independence: Editors should make decisions based on the quality and integrity of the research, independent of commercial or financial considerations. Editorial decisions should not be influenced by advertisers, sponsors, or any other external entities.
11. Corrections, Retractions, and Errata: Editors should be willing to publish corrections, retractions, or errata when errors or misconduct are identified post-publication. Corrections should be published in a timely and transparent manner.
12. Diversity and Inclusion: Editors should promote diversity and inclusion in the selection of reviewers, authors, and editorial board members. Manuscripts should be evaluated based on their scientific merit, regardless of the authors' backgrounds.
13. Continuous Improvement: Editors should strive for continuous improvement of the journal's processes, policies, and ethical standards. Feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers should be considered to enhance the quality and credibility of the publication.

 

Duties of peer reviewers 
Publication Ethics for Peer Reviewers:

1. Confidentiality and Anonymity: Peer reviewers should treat all materials received for review as confidential and should not disclose, share, or discuss the content with unauthorized individuals. Reviewing should be conducted anonymously unless the journal has an open peer review policy.
2. Conflict of Interest: Peer reviewers should promptly declare any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality or objectivity in reviewing a manuscript. If a conflict is identified, reviewers should decline the review or provide full disclosure to the journal editor.
3. Expertise and Competence: Peer reviewers should possess the necessary expertise and knowledge to critically evaluate the manuscript's subject matter, methodology, and findings. If reviewers lack the expertise to assess certain aspects, they should inform the editor.
4. Constructive and Objective Evaluation: Reviews should be conducted objectively, providing constructive feedback to the authors. Reviewers should assess the originality, significance, methodology, and validity of the research, focusing on improving the quality of the manuscript.
5. Respect for Authorship: Reviewers should respect the intellectual property and originality of the authors' work. Any suggestions for improvement should be provided in a respectful and supportive manner.
6. Ethical Considerations: Reviewers should be vigilant in identifying any ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest, and should promptly report such issues to the editor.
7. Timeliness: Reviewers should adhere to the agreed-upon timeline for completing the review and should inform the editor if circumstances prevent them from meeting the deadline.
8. Confidentiality Breach and Unpublished Information: Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information from the manuscript for personal gain or other purposes. The insights gained through the review process should be treated confidentially.
9. Transparency and Clarity: Reviewers should provide clear and well-structured feedback, substantiated by evidence or examples from the manuscript. Any recommendations or suggestions should be explained thoroughly.
10. Influence on Editorial Decision: Reviewers should recognize that their role is advisory, and the final decision lies with the editor. Reviews should not be used to promote personal biases or preferences.
11. Diversity and Inclusion: Reviewers should assess manuscripts based on their scientific merit and should not introduce biases related to the authors' background, affiliation, or other personal factors.
12. Feedback to Editors: Reviewers should provide feedback to the editor about any concerns regarding ethical issues, conflicts of interest, or other matters that could impact the review process or publication decision.
13. Continual Learning: Reviewers should continuously strive to improve their reviewing skills and stay updated on ethical guidelines and best practices in peer review.

---