PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

1. Introduction

Wacana Equiliberium (Jurnal Pemikiran Penelitian Ekonomi), published by Universitas Islam Madura and managed by the Faculty of Economics, Universitas Islam Madura, is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing.

This statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher throughout the manuscript submission, evaluation, publication, and post-publication processes.

The journal follows internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing and refers to the guidance and core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when addressing ethical concerns and publication misconduct.

This policy applies to all scholarly contributions submitted to or published in Wacana Equiliberium and should be read in conjunction with the journal's Peer Review Policy, Author Guidelines, Plagiarism Policy, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

2.1 Originality and Academic Integrity

Authors must submit original scholarly work that has not been previously published or simultaneously submitted to another journal.

All sources of information, ideas, data, and previously published findings must be appropriately acknowledged and cited.

Plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, misleading manipulation of research findings, inappropriate image alteration, citation manipulation, and duplicate publication are prohibited.

Any use of previously disseminated material, including conference papers, preprints, or related publications, must be disclosed when relevant to the originality and publication status of the submitted manuscript.

2.2 Accurate and Transparent Reporting

Authors must accurately describe their research objectives, methodological procedures, data sources, analyses, results, and conclusions.

Research methods must be reported in sufficient detail to allow readers and reviewers to evaluate the reliability, validity, and reproducibility of the findings.

Research limitations, uncertainties, and relevant methodological constraints should be transparently acknowledged.

Authors must not present unsupported interpretations, fabricated evidence, or misleading conclusions as established scientific findings.

2.3 Data Availability and Reproducibility

Authors are responsible for maintaining appropriate research records and supporting documentation.

The editorial team may request original data, analytical procedures, research instruments, statistical outputs, or other supporting information when necessary to verify the integrity of a manuscript.

Authors are encouraged to make research data and materials accessible when legally, ethically, and practically appropriate.

Where data cannot be shared because of participant confidentiality, contractual restrictions, commercial sensitivity, or applicable legal requirements, authors should explain the relevant limitations.

The journal does not require disclosure of confidential or personally identifiable information in violation of ethical or legal obligations.

2.4 Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must accurately reflect substantial intellectual contributions to the research and manuscript.

Individuals listed as authors should have made meaningful contributions to the work, participated in drafting or critically reviewing the manuscript, approved the final version, and accepted responsibility for their contributions and the integrity of the publication.

Individuals whose contributions do not justify authorship should be appropriately acknowledged, subject to their consent where necessary.

Guest, gift, honorary, and ghost authorship are prohibited.

The corresponding author must ensure that all legitimate authors are included, that authorship information is accurate, and that all co-authors approve the submission and final manuscript.

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be supported by an appropriate explanation and the agreement of all affected authors.

Authorship disputes that cannot be resolved through editorial clarification may be referred to the authors' institutions.

2.5 Funding and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose funding sources, financial relationships, institutional affiliations, personal interests, or other circumstances that could reasonably influence the research or its interpretation.

The absence of relevant competing interests should also be declared.

Funding disclosures should identify the role of sponsors in research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions, where applicable.

2.6 Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants, personal information, interviews, surveys, or other ethically sensitive activities must comply with applicable ethical standards and legal requirements.

Authors must obtain approval from an appropriate ethics committee or institutional authority when required and provide accurate information concerning ethical approval in their manuscripts.

Informed consent must be obtained when required by the research design, applicable regulations, or institutional procedures.

If formal ethical approval was not required, authors should be prepared to explain the basis for this determination.

Research involving confidential organizational, financial, accounting, or business information must comply with applicable data protection and authorization requirements.

2.7 Correction of Errors

Authors who discover significant errors, inaccuracies, or ethical concerns in their submitted or published work must promptly inform the editorial team.

Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable editorial inquiries and necessary corrections, clarifications, or retractions.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

3.1 Editorial Independence and Fairness

The Editor-in-Chief and authorized handling editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity, fairness, independence, and consistency of editorial evaluation.

Editorial decisions must be based on manuscript originality, scholarly contribution, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal's scope, reviewer assessments, and ethical compliance.

Decisions must not be influenced by authors' nationality, gender, ethnicity, religious beliefs, institutional affiliation, political views, personal relationships, or other characteristics unrelated to scholarly merit.

The journal's publisher and managing institution must respect editorial independence and must not improperly influence manuscript acceptance or rejection.

3.2 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, unpublished findings, reviewer identities, and editorial communications.

Confidential information may be disclosed only to individuals legitimately involved in manuscript assessment or ethical investigation, where necessary and appropriate.

Unpublished manuscript information must not be used for personal research, commercial advantage, or other unauthorized purposes.

3.3 Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must disclose relevant financial, personal, professional, academic, or institutional conflicts of interest.

An editor with a significant conflict must recuse themselves from the evaluation and decision-making process.

Editorial responsibility should be reassigned to another appropriately qualified editor when necessary to preserve independence and impartiality.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, or individuals closely associated with the editorial team must undergo an independent and appropriately managed evaluation process.

3.4 Editorial Decisions and Accountability

The Editor-in-Chief or authorized handling editor makes publication decisions in accordance with the journal's established Peer Review Policy.

Reviewers' recommendations inform editorial decisions but do not independently determine manuscript acceptance or rejection.

Editors are responsible for evaluating reported ethical concerns and initiating appropriate procedures to protect the scholarly record.

4. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Wacana Equiliberium applies a double-blind peer-review system.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and constructively.

  • Maintain confidentiality regarding manuscripts and editorial communications.

  • Accept review assignments only when they possess suitable expertise.

  • Notify editors promptly when they cannot complete reviews within the agreed period.

  • Disclose potential conflicts of interest before accepting assignments.

  • Identify relevant scientific weaknesses, methodological limitations, substantial overlap, or potential research misconduct.

  • Avoid personal criticism, discriminatory language, and unsupported allegations.

  • Refrain from requesting irrelevant citations or attempting to manipulate citation counts.

  • Avoid using unpublished manuscripts, research ideas, or confidential information for personal advantage.

  • Comply with the journal's Artificial Intelligence Policy.

Reviewers must not delegate their assignments, share confidential manuscripts, or upload unpublished manuscript materials to unauthorized third-party systems.

Suspected ethical violations must be reported confidentially to the handling editor.

5. Responsibilities of the Publisher and Managing Institution

Universitas Islam Madura, as the publisher, and the Faculty of Economics, Universitas Islam Madura, as the managing unit, support the journal's commitment to responsible scholarly publishing.

Their responsibilities include supporting appropriate editorial infrastructure, maintaining institutional accountability, facilitating the implementation of publication policies, and safeguarding editorial independence.

The publisher and managing institution should cooperate with the editorial team when concerns involving research integrity, publication misconduct, legal obligations, or the reliability of the scholarly record require institutional attention.

Commercial, financial, or institutional considerations must not override legitimate scholarly and ethical judgments.

6. Allegations of Research Misconduct

6.1 Forms of Research Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

  • Fabrication or falsification of research data, evidence, or findings.

  • Plagiarism, substantial unattributed copying, or inappropriate text recycling.

  • Duplicate or redundant publication without appropriate disclosure.

  • Manipulation of citations, peer review, or authorship.

  • Misrepresentation of research methods, ethical approval, or informed consent.

  • Unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information.

  • Misleading alteration of images, figures, statistical results, or supporting materials.

  • Undisclosed or deceptive use of artificial intelligence to misrepresent research evidence.

6.2 Handling Allegations

Concerns regarding suspected misconduct may be raised by reviewers, readers, editors, authors, institutions, or other relevant parties.

The editorial team will assess allegations according to their nature, credibility, seriousness, and available supporting evidence.

The assessment may involve:

  1. An initial examination of the concern and relevant documentation.

  2. Identification and management of potential conflicts of interest.

  3. Communication with the corresponding author or other involved parties to request clarification.

  4. Independent expert assessment or further verification when necessary.

  5. Referral to relevant institutions when formal investigation is required.

  6. Determination of an appropriate editorial response based on available evidence.

Investigations will be conducted with reasonable confidentiality, impartiality, proportionality, and respect for due process.

Accused parties should be given an appropriate opportunity to respond before a final determination is made, except where urgent protective action is necessary.

Editors will not make unsupported findings of misconduct or rely exclusively on automated similarity or AI-detection scores.

6.3 Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the severity of the concern and the evidence available, editorial actions may include requesting clarification, requiring corrections, suspending evaluation, rejecting a manuscript, issuing a correction, publishing an expression of concern, or retracting a published article.

When an institutional investigation is needed, the journal may contact the relevant institution while maintaining appropriate confidentiality.

The journal will take reasonable steps to protect individuals who raise concerns in good faith from retaliation.

7. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

Submitted manuscripts may undergo similarity screening using appropriate plagiarism-detection or editorial assessment tools.

Similarity reports are treated as supporting information rather than conclusive evidence of plagiarism.

Editors will evaluate the nature, context, sources, and extent of textual overlap, including properly cited material, standard methodological expressions, and legitimate reuse.

Manuscripts containing confirmed plagiarism or serious unattributed reproduction may be rejected or subject to appropriate post-publication action.

Further details are provided in the journal's Plagiarism Policy.

8. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Wacana Equiliberium supports the responsible, transparent, and ethically appropriate use of artificial intelligence in scholarly research and publishing.

Authors remain fully accountable for the accuracy, originality, validity, and integrity of AI-assisted content.

AI systems cannot be designated as authors or co-authors.

Substantive use of generative AI must be disclosed in accordance with the journal's Artificial Intelligence Policy.

Reviewers and editors must protect manuscript confidentiality and must not rely on AI systems as substitutes for independent scholarly assessment.

Suspected AI-related misconduct will be evaluated using appropriate evidence and established principles of fair editorial assessment.

9. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Wacana Equiliberium is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the published scholarly record.

9.1 Corrections

A correction may be published when an error affects the accuracy or clarity of an article but does not invalidate its principal conclusions.

Correction notices should clearly identify the affected article, describe the issue, and provide an appropriate link to the original publication.

9.2 Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions arise regarding the integrity or reliability of a published article but the available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing.

Such notices should clearly describe the nature of the concern without presenting unverified allegations as established facts.

9.3 Retractions

An article may be retracted when its findings are unreliable due to major errors, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research practices, redundant publication, or other serious issues that undermine the published record.

Retraction decisions should follow a fair assessment of available evidence and relevant COPE guidance.

Retraction notices must be clearly identified and linked to the original article, with the reasons for retraction stated as transparently as appropriate.

Retracted articles should ordinarily remain identifiable in the scholarly record with clear retraction labeling rather than being silently removed.

10. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may submit complaints or appeals concerning editorial procedures, publication decisions, ethical concerns, reviewer conduct, or potential conflicts of interest.

Complaints should be submitted through the journal's official contact channels and should include a clear description of the concern and relevant supporting information.

The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately independent editor will review the complaint, determine whether further investigation is necessary, and communicate the outcome to the complainant when appropriate.

Where a complaint directly concerns the Editor-in-Chief, responsibility for assessing the matter should be assigned to an independent editor or appropriate institutional authority.

Appeals against editorial decisions should identify substantive procedural concerns, factual errors, conflicts of interest, or significant evidence that may justify reconsideration.

The journal aims to address complaints fairly, confidentially, and without retaliation against individuals raising concerns in good faith.

Official contact information is available at:

https://journal.uim.ac.id/index.php/equilibrium/about/contact

11. Post-Publication Discussion

Wacana Equiliberium welcomes academically constructive discussion concerning published articles.

Readers may submit comments, scholarly critiques, methodological concerns, or requests for clarification through the journal's official communication channels.

The editorial team will assess whether the submission raises a substantive scholarly issue and whether an appropriate response from the original authors should be requested.

When justified, post-publication discussions may be published as Letters to the Editor, author replies, corrections, or other appropriate editorial notices.

All discussions must be conducted respectfully and supported by relevant scientific reasoning or evidence.

12. Copyright, Licensing, and Intellectual Property

Authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher must respect applicable copyright and intellectual property rights.

Authors are responsible for obtaining appropriate permission to reproduce copyrighted materials and for correctly attributing third-party content.

The rights of authors and users of published content are governed by the journal's applicable Copyright Notice and Open Access Policy.

Copyright and licensing information must be accurately presented and consistently applied across the journal's website, publication metadata, and published articles.

13. Policy Implementation and Review

This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement applies to all participants in the journal's scholarly publishing process.

The editorial team is responsible for implementing the policy in coordination with the publisher and managing institution, where appropriate.

The policy may be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect developments in research integrity, publication ethics, applicable regulations, and scholarly publishing standards.

Wacana Equiliberium refers to relevant COPE guidance when handling ethical issues, while retaining responsibility for applying fair and appropriate procedures to individual cases.

Related Journal Policies