Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics Statement  ·  Jurnal Civics
Standards for everyone who publishes with us.
Duties of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, following COPE.
01
Introduction
Jurnal Civics: Media Kajian Kewarganegaraan is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. The journal is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics. All parties involved in publishing must know and follow these standards: authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.
This statement is based on the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and on the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME).
Our commitments. Integrity  ·  Fairness and non-discrimination  ·  Confidentiality  ·  Transparency  ·  Accountability  ·  Respect for research participants and communities.
02
Duties of authors
Originality and plagiarism
—  Submit entirely original work and properly cite or quote the work and words of others.
—  Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable, including verbatim copying, uncited paraphrasing, translation plagiarism, and substantial text recycling from one’s own work.
—  All manuscripts are checked with similarity-detection software. See the Plagiarism Policy.
Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication
—  A manuscript must not have been published before and must not be under consideration by another journal.
—  Publications based on the same data or study must be disclosed and cross-referenced. A previous conference presentation or preprint must be stated at submission.
Authorship
—  Authorship is limited to those who made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the study. They must also have drafted or critically revised the manuscript, approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for the work.
—  Contributions are described using the CRediT taxonomy. Others who contributed are acknowledged.
—  Gift, guest, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Any change to the author list after submission needs the written agreement of all authors and the editor’s approval.
—  The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors have approved the submission and is the contact with the journal.
Data, accuracy, and reporting standards
—  Give an accurate account of the work and an objective discussion of its significance. Report data honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or selective omission.
—  Follow the reporting standards appropriate to the study, for example PRISMA 2020 for systematic reviews.
—  Keep the raw data and provide it on the editor’s request. Include a Data Availability Statement.
Research with human participants
—  Research with human participants, such as interviews, surveys, observations, or classroom research, must have the approval or exemption of an appropriate ethics committee.
—  Obtain informed consent from participants, or from guardians for minors.
—  Protect confidentiality and anonymity, and take particular care with vulnerable groups, such as children, students, minorities, migrants, and people in conflict settings.
—  Photographs or quotations that could identify individuals need explicit consent.
Conflicts of interest and funding
—  Disclose in a Disclosure Statement any financial or non-financial interests that could be seen to influence the work, including institutional, political, personal, or religious interests. See Conflict of Interest.
—  Declare all funding sources and the funder’s role.
Use of generative AI
—  Generative AI may assist with tasks such as language editing, translation, idea generation, literature classification, and coding. It must not be used to generate data, results, images presented as data, or references.
—  AI tools cannot be authors. Any use is disclosed in a Declaration of Generative AI Use, giving the tool and version, how and why it was used, and how the output was checked.
—  Reviewers and editors do not upload unpublished manuscripts to AI tools.
—  Full details are in the Generative AI Policy.
Errors in published work
—  When authors discover a significant error in their published work, they promptly notify the editor and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article (see Correction & Retraction).
03
Duties of editors
Publication decisions
—  The Editor-in-Chief decides which manuscripts are published, on originality, rigour, significance, relevance to the journal’s scope, and the reviewers’ advice. Decisions are not based on commercial considerations.
—  Decisions are made within the timelines of the Peer Review Process: a first decision within about 6 weeks, and a final decision normally within 4 months of submission.
Fairness and non-discrimination
—  Manuscripts are evaluated solely on scholarly merit. The authors’ race, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, political views, institution, or seniority are not taken into account.
Confidentiality
—  Editors disclose information about a submitted manuscript only to the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers, as appropriate. They protect the anonymity of authors and reviewers in double-anonymous review.
—  Unpublished material is not used for an editor’s own research without the authors’ written consent.
Conflicts of interest
—  Editors withdraw from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, for example a collaborative, competitive, institutional, or personal relationship with the authors.
—  Manuscripts submitted by editors or editorial board members are handled independently by another editor, and the editor-author is excluded from the review process.
Handling of ethical concerns
—  Editors take reasonable and timely action when ethical concerns are raised about a manuscript or published article, following the COPE flowcharts and the Research Misconduct policy.
—  They correct the scholarly record through corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions where necessary.
04
Duties of reviewers
—  Contribution to decisions: reviewers help editors decide and help authors improve their manuscripts. They need relevant expertise.
—  Promptness: reviewers who feel unqualified, or who cannot finish the review within 21 days, decline promptly.
—  Confidentiality: manuscripts are confidential. They are not shared or discussed with others, and are not uploaded to generative AI tools.
—  Objectivity: reviews are objective, specific, and courteous, and support their points with clear arguments. Personal criticism is inappropriate. Reviewers do not ask authors to cite the reviewer’s own work without a genuine scholarly reason.
—  Acknowledgement of sources: reviewers point out relevant published work that has not been cited, and tell the editor about any substantial similarity with other work or any suspected misconduct.
—  Conflicts of interest: reviewers decline manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest, and do not try to identify the authors.
05
Duties of the publisher
—  Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, as publisher, supports the editorial independence of the journal and does not interfere in editorial decisions.
—  The publisher provides the resources needed for similarity checking, DOI registration with Crossref, long-term digital preservation, and maintaining the integrity of the published record.
—  The publisher works with the editors to handle ethical concerns, corrections, and retractions, following COPE guidance.
—  The publisher states the journal’s ownership, funding, fees, and advertising policy openly, following the Principles of Transparency. See Revenue and Business Model, Author Fees, and the Advertising Policy.
06
The ten COPE Core Practices
The journal applies each of the ten COPE Core Practices as follows:
1. Allegations of misconduct Handled confidentially and fairly, following the COPE flowcharts, as set out in the Research Misconduct policy. Allegations are handled whether they arise before or after publication.
2. Authorship and contributorship Authorship follows the Authorship Criteria, and contributions are stated with CRediT roles. Disputes that the journal cannot resolve are referred to the authors’ institutions.
3. Complaints and appeals Appeals against editorial decisions go to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of the decision and are decided by an editor who was not involved in the original decision. Complaints about the journal’s processes are handled by the Editor-in-Chief, or by the publisher if the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief.
4. Conflicts of interest Disclosed by authors, reviewers, and editors, as described above and in the Conflict of Interest policy.
5. Data and reproducibility Data Availability Statements are required, raw data may be requested, and reporting standards such as PRISMA 2020 apply where relevant.
6. Ethical oversight Ethics approval or exemption and informed consent are required for research with human participants. See the Ethical Clearance Statement.
7. Intellectual property Articles are published open access under a Creative Commons licence, as stated in the Copyright Notice and Licensing Terms. Plagiarism and copyright infringement are not tolerated.
8. Journal management The editorial board, ownership, business model, fees, and policies are published on the journal website. See Ownership & Management and Revenue and Business Model.
9. Peer review processes Double-anonymous review by at least three reviewers, as described in the Peer Review Process.
10. Post-publication discussions and corrections Comments, errata, corrigenda, expressions of concern, and retractions, as described in Post-publication Discussions and Corrections and Correction & Retraction.
07
Reporting ethical concerns
1.  Send your concern to the Editor-in-Chief through the journal website, with the manuscript ID or the article DOI and specific evidence.
2.  You will receive an acknowledgement within 7 working days. Your identity will be kept confidential.
3.  The editors assess the concern, contact the parties involved, and act according to COPE guidance and the journal’s policies.
08
Sources
Committee on Publication Ethics. (2017). Core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
Committee on Publication Ethics. (2017). Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers (Version 2). https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers
Committee on Publication Ethics. Authorship and AI tools: COPE position statement. https://publicationethics.org/guidance/cope-position/authorship-and-ai-tools
Committee on Publication Ethics, Directory of Open Access Journals, Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association, & World Association of Medical Editors. (2022). Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing (Version 4). https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/principles-transparency-and-best-practice-scholarly-publishing