Publication Ethics

Scientia Biologica Indonesia is a peer-reviewed and open access journal published by Terrestrial Indonesia, committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and taking all necessary steps to prevent publication violations. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior that should be followed by all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the associate editor, the editorial board, the reviewer, and the publisher. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Our responsibility is to publish original work that provides value to the intellectual community in the best possible form and to the highest standards. We expect similar standards from reviewers and authors. Honesty, originality, and fair treatment of authors, as well as objectivity, fairness, and confidentiality of editors and reviewers, are essential values that enable us to achieve this goal. Scientia Biologica Indonesia is committed to following best practice in ethical matters, misconduct and retractions, and providing legal review when necessary.

Author's Duties

• Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate description of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. Papers should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• Authors are asked to provide the raw data related to a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data and to retain it for a reasonable time after publication.
• Authors should ensure that the work they write is entirely original, and if they use the work and/or words of others this has been appropriately cited or referenced.
• Authors 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 concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• 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.
• Ownership of work should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Those who participated in certain substantive aspects of the research 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 authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
• All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantial conflict of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
• If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, the author has an obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
• If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have exceptional hazards in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Editor's Duties

• Editors should evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• 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.
• Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
• The journal's editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Such decisions should be based on the validity of the work 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.
• The editor must ensure that each manuscript is first evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their review processes in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal are subject to peer review.

Reviewer Duties

• Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
• Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
• Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and provide supporting arguments.
• Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as approved by the editor.
• 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, whether resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the work.
• Reviewers should identify relevant work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.