Publication Ethics Statement
The Editors of Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology issue a set of publication ethics as guidelines for authors engaged in the publication of scientific research to comply with COPE Core Practices and establishes a high-quality standard of ethics for journal publication.
The purpose of this policy is to prevent any misconduct related to research conducted for the journals and to suggest the fundamental principles and structural procedures in relation to research integrity deliberation required to ensure research ethics.
The range of misconduct policy
Research misconduct suggested in this policy pertains to fraud and refers to data fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, plagiarism, and improper authorship.
- Fabrication refers to any activity involving the creation of false information about non-existing data or findings.
- Falsification refers to the artificial manipulation of the research materials/equipment/process or random modification/deletion of data resulting in distorted research contents or research results.
- Plagiarism refers to acts of pirating others' ideas, research contents, and research results without justifiable approvals or quotations.
- Improper authorship refers to cases where the person who has contributed to research contents or research results is scientifically and technically unqualified as an author, or where someone who has not contributed to the research contents or research results has been listed as an author merely to express gratitude or courtesy.
- Intentional acts to disturb a fraud investigation about themselves or others, or acts which can be harmful to informants.
- Unfair evaluation regarding research of others, or disclosure/pirating of research ideas or results acquired during the evaluation process.
- Severely aberrant acts that cannot be accepted in the community of the field of science and technology.
How does the journal address misconduct
Editors and publishers have an ethical obligation to:
- Support the quality and ethics of the review process (pre-publication: weed out; prevent)
- Ensure the correctness of the published literature (post-publication: correct; communicate)
- Educate (prevent)
Editors/journals have an ethical obligation to respond and to address ethical allegations that may arise about published papers or papers in review. Systems and procedures are in place for investigating and addressing situations of misconduct, including cooperation with investigations from institutions or funding bodies.
Possible sanction
When the evidence of misconduct is confirmed, the following procedures are to be applied:
- Prior to publication (during review): The manuscript can be withdrawn from review.
- Post-publication (literature correction): The journal may publish a Retraction, Note of Editorial Concern, or Errata/Correction with the author(s)' signature or an appropriate editorial statement about the situation. The paper can be "marked" in the literature.
- Editors determine whether to retract or correct after considering whether the case is fraud or an honest mistake, weighing intent and the extent to which the data is incorrect/misleading.
- The author may be banned from submitting to the journal.
- Editors may, in some cases, provide information to other editors/publishers.
- Editors may publish an editorial in the journal to discuss the issue generally and raise awareness.
Authors are expected to comply with the following ethical guidelines. Any infringement may lead to a retraction of the article or a ban from journal publication.
- The author's main obligation is to deliver accurate and complete details of the research performed. The research data should contain sufficient information on the related subject.
- Authors should ensure the originality of their work and that neither fraud nor fabrication is involved in their manuscript.
- Authors should guarantee that the article has not been published previously or is not being evaluated for publication elsewhere.
- Authors should ensure that their works do not contain any unlawful statements and/or comments that may violate the law.
- Authors are aware of and abide by the misconduct policy.
Authors listed on an article must meet all of the following criteria:
- Made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether in conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or all of these areas.
- Have drafted or written, or substantially revised or critically reviewed the article.
- Have agreed on the journal to which the article will be submitted.
- Reviewed and agreed on all versions of the article before submission, during revision, the final accepted version, and any significant changes introduced at the proofing stage.
- Agree to take responsibility and be accountable for the contents of the article, and to share responsibility for resolving any questions raised about its accuracy or integrity.
- Editors should provide fair judgment and consideration to all manuscripts based on quality, with no regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
- Editors are responsible for considering all submitted manuscripts within a reasonable time frame.
- Editors, with their expertise and fair judgment, are responsible for accepting or rejecting manuscripts, and for building good communication with authors regarding publication. The final decision will be accompanied by reviewer comments.
- Editors shall ensure no private information about authors is included in the manuscript sent to reviewers.
- Editors should ensure the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and not disclose any information about it to other parties.
- Editors are to respect an author's well-reasoned request not to use certain reviewers, though editors may still use such reviewers if their professional input is considered important.
- Editors are to comply with COPE practices when considering a manuscript for publication.
The below procedure applies to appeals to editorial decisions, complaints about process failures such as long delays in handling papers, and complaints about publication ethics. The complaint should first be handled by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the Editor who handled the paper. If they are the subject of the complaint, please approach the publisher contact.
Complaint about scientific content, e.g. an appeal against rejection
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor considers the authors' argument and the reviewer reports, then decides whether (1) the decision to reject should stand, (2) another independent opinion is required, or (3) the appeal should be considered. The complainant is informed of the decision with an explanation if appropriate. Decisions on appeals are final, and new submissions take priority over appeals.
Complaint about processes, e.g. time taken to review
The Editor-in-Chief, together with the Handling Editor and/or publisher contact where appropriate, will investigate the matter. The complainant will be given appropriate feedback, which is also provided to relevant stakeholders to improve processes and procedures.
Complaint about publication ethics, e.g., researcher's, author's, or reviewer's conduct
The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor follows guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics, and may ask the publisher for advice on difficult cases. A course of action is decided and feedback is provided to the complainant. If the complainant remains dissatisfied, they may submit the complaint to the Committee on Publication Ethics.
Authors, Editors, and Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following guidelines in compliance with COPE practices.
- Authors should clearly disclose their source of financial support — institutional, private, and/or corporate — for their research.
- If the author and editor of Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology have a relationship that may lead to an unfair evaluation, another editor will be appointed instead.
- Reviewers should be aware of any appearance of conflict of interest when receiving a manuscript for evaluation, and are required to promptly return the manuscript to the editor, disclosing the conflict.
Data availability and reporting guidelines are available in the Author Guidelines section. Authors are encouraged to provide the underlying data connected with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data where practicable, retaining it for a reasonable period following publication to support verification and reproducibility.
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is likewise the author's obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper, or provide evidence of the correctness of the original findings.
All submitted articles and exchanges of information involving authors and editors in Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology will be treated as confidential. Communications related to the publication process should not be disclosed on any website without prior consent from the editors.
The names and email addresses entered on this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be shared with any other parties or used for other purposes.
While Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology primarily publishes research in computational, organizational, educational, and socio-economic domains, the following ethical guidelines are maintained to ensure readiness should submissions involving human subjects, animal research, cell lines, or plant materials be received, in alignment with international research ethics standards.
Research Involving Human Subjects
All research involving humans (individuals, samples, or data) must comply with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval must be obtained from the local institutional review board (IRB) or an equivalent ethics committee prior to the commencement of the study. Manuscripts must include a statement confirming ethical approval, providing the name of the ethics committee and reference or permit numbers where applicable.
For non-interventional studies (e.g., surveys) where ethical approval is not required due to national laws, or where an exemption has been granted, this must be clearly stated in the manuscript along with a full explanation and the name of the granting ethics committee. Researchers uncertain about the need for ethical approval should consult the relevant department before conducting their study.
Non-stigmatizing and non-discriminatory language must be used when describing participant groups categorized by race, ethnicity, age, disease, disability, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or other characteristics. Manuscripts should include explanations for such categorizations, including definitions and any requirements imposed by funding agencies or ethics boards.
For studies involving vulnerable populations, additional review by the editorial office will be conducted. Authors may be required to provide supporting documentation, such as blank consent forms or records of discussions with ethics boards. Any categorization of participants must be scientifically justified and clearly stated in the manuscript.
Studies on human organ transplantation are subject to all ethical standards for human research. Authors must disclose the institutions, clinics, or departments where organs or tissues were sourced. Manuscripts reporting data obtained through unethical practices — such as illegal trade, executed prisoners, or other violations — will not be accepted. Articles critically examining such practices may be considered at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, provided a prior written appeal is submitted to the editorial office. For additional guidance, this policy aligns with the glossary maintained by the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network.
The editorial team requires that any research involving animals demonstrates significant potential benefits in relation to the harm caused to the animals. Procedures must be conducted with sensitivity and in a manner unlikely to cause offense to the majority of readers. Researchers must ensure their work adheres to the widely accepted principles of the "3Rs":
- Replace animals with alternative methods wherever feasible.
- Minimize the number of animals used without compromising the integrity of the results.
- Optimize experimental conditions and procedures to minimize pain, distress, or harm to animals.
Authors must provide detailed information on housing, husbandry, and pain management procedures in their manuscripts. For further guidance, authors should refer to resources such as the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures, the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, or the European Animal Research Association.
If national regulations require it, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must receive prior approval from an appropriate ethics committee. The manuscript should include the project identification code, approval date, and the name of the ethics committee in the "Institutional Review Board Statement" section, along with a statement confirming compliance with relevant legislation.
Clinical studies involving animals and interventions beyond routine care require oversight from an ethics committee, following the guidelines of the American Veterinary Medical Association. For studies involving client-owned animals, informed consent from the owners must be obtained and documented, with owners fully informed of any risks.
If ethical approval is not mandated by national laws, authors must provide documentation of exemption from an ethics committee, if available, along with an explanation of why approval was not required. In cases where an animal ethics committee is unavailable, the ethics of the study will be assessed by the journal's editors and reviewers using a utilitarian framework similar to that used by ethics committees. Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all ethical statements provided in the manuscript.
Research Involving Cell Lines
For studies involving cell lines, authors must ensure that the cell lines used are clearly identified, with details on their source, including the repository or supplier name and any associated catalog numbers. Authors should confirm that the cell lines were authenticated, including testing for contamination (e.g., mycoplasma testing) and cross-contamination with other cell lines.
If the cell lines are derived from human or animal tissues, authors must state whether they were obtained in compliance with relevant ethical guidelines, including informed consent from donors where applicable and appropriate ethical approval. Details regarding the institution, ethics committee, approval date, and reference number should be included.
For established cell lines, authors should reference the original publications describing their development. If the cell lines are novel, authors must provide detailed information about their generation and characterization to allow reproducibility. Researchers must ensure that all experiments involving cell lines comply with standards such as those outlined by the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC).
Research Involving Plants
Experimental research involving plants (cultivated or wild), including the collection of plant materials, must adhere to institutional, national, and international guidelines. Authors are strongly encouraged to comply with the principles outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).
All submitted manuscripts must provide information regarding the genetic origin and source of the plant materials used. For studies involving rare or non-model plants (excluding common models such as Solanum lycopersicum, Zea mays, Triticum aestivum, and other widely recognized model species), voucher specimens should be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum, including population, collection site (GPS coordinates), date, and plant part(s) used.
For research involving rare, threatened, or endangered species, deposition of voucher specimens may be waived, provided authors explain the reasons and confirm compliance with ethical and conservation guidelines in the cover letter. The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements or lack appropriate documentation.
Disclaimer
The viewpoint of articles published in Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology are solely the authors' and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board of the publisher.
Copyright
The author is responsible for acquiring permission(s) to reproduce any copyrighted figures, tables, data, or text used in the submitted paper. Authors should note that substantial quotations from a published or copyrighted work will require a grant of permission from the original publisher to reprint. The written permission letter(s) must be submitted together with the manuscript.
Publishing
This journal uses Open Journal System, a journal management and publishing software developed, supported, and distributed by the Public Knowledge Project (PKP).
This journal is available online and can be accessed for free.
Publication in this journal follows an Article Processing Charge scheme, and all published papers are available online through open access. For full details on fees and waiver eligibility, please see our Article Processing Charge page.
All papers will be critically examined by anonymous reviewer(s), selected for their competencies in the subject area of the paper. Acceptance depends on scientific merit and suitability for Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology. A paper may be accepted in its original form, subject to revision, or rejected.
The reviewers' and editors' suggestions will be conveyed to the author, who will then have an opportunity to revise the paper. Please see detailed information about our Peer Review Process.
Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology maintains a strict policy against plagiarism and adheres to the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Plagiarism includes copying text, data, or ideas without proper citation, reusing significant portions of previous work without acknowledgment, or presenting fabricated data. Self-plagiarism, or reusing one's own work without proper citation, is also prohibited.
All submitted manuscripts will be checked for plagiarism using plagiarism detection tools. If plagiarism is detected, the manuscript will be rejected and the authors contacted for clarification. If identified after publication, the article may be retracted and the author's institution notified if necessary.
To prevent plagiarism, authors are encouraged to properly cite all sources, paraphrase effectively, and ensure their work is original. We recommend using plagiarism detection tools before submitting and adhering to the COPE Code of Conduct and Core Practices. Serious cases of plagiarism may result in a ban from submitting future work to this journal.
Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and follows the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We expect authors, reviewers, and editors to maintain transparency, honesty, and integrity throughout the publication process.
Author Responsibilities
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original, properly cited, and free from plagiarism. They must confirm that all co-authors have contributed to the manuscript and disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Authors should also obtain necessary ethical approvals for studies involving humans, animals, or sensitive materials. Any errors identified post-submission or post-publication must be promptly addressed.
Reviewer and Editor Responsibilities
Reviewers must assess manuscripts objectively, without bias, and maintain confidentiality. They should declare any conflicts of interest and refrain from reviewing manuscripts where they have personal or professional connections with the authors. Editors are responsible for making unbiased decisions based on quality and originality, ensuring ethical standards are maintained, and handling complaints and appeals fairly and transparently.
Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology is committed to promoting Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) in all aspects of our publication process. We aim to create a fair and inclusive environment where all voices, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, nationality, disability, sexual orientation, or other identities, are respected and valued.
Commitment to Equal Opportunity
We strive to ensure that every manuscript, regardless of the background of its author(s), is treated with fairness and respect throughout submission, review, and publication. Manuscripts should avoid discriminatory language and be respectful of all communities and identities.
Inclusive Editorial Practices
We encourage diversity among our editorial and review board members, recognizing that varied perspectives enhance the quality of the research we publish. We will make reasonable accommodations to ensure accessibility for authors, reviewers, and readers with disabilities, and support efforts to elevate underrepresented voices, including early-career researchers.
Scientechno: Journal of Science and Technology follows the guidance from COPE regarding ethical concerns for published articles. The Editor-in-Chief can be contacted at journal@adra.ac.id should authors have an objection or disagreement pertaining to the publication process. Every complaint will be acknowledged and handled to resolve the issue accordingly.
Articles may be retracted for scientific and/or ethical reasons, at the request of the author(s) or the Editor. Articles found to be seriously flawed or in violation of COPE guidance will be retracted to correct the scientific record. See our Correction, Retraction, and Withdrawal Policy page for full detail. The retracted article will be noted on the journal's website alongside the reason for retraction.