Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

JURNAL RIPTEK is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and adheres strictly to the Core Practices and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Below are the ethical duties and responsibilities for editors, reviewers, and authors, along with journal policies concerning governance, access, and integrity.

1. Publication Decisions

The editor of JURNAL RIPTEK is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

2. Fair Play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

3. Confidentiality

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.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

5. Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
• Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
• Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published 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. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: 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 resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

6. Duties of Authors

• Reporting Standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
• Data Access and Retention: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
• Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
• Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author 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.
• Acknowledgment of Sources: 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.
• Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they 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 co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
• Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
• Fundamental Errors in Published Works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

7. Authorship Criteria

Authorship must be restricted to individuals who have met all of the following criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

8. Allegation of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, data fabrication, data falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, and plagiarism. In the event of suspected research misconduct—whether occurring before or after publication—the editorial office will take appropriate action guided by COPE flowcharts and guidelines. The editor shall investigate the allegation, consult with reviewers and the editorial board, and provide the author an opportunity to respond. If misconduct is established, appropriate corrective measures (such as manuscript rejection, retraction, or notification of the author's institution) will be enforced.

9. Conflict of Interest

Conflicts of interest (COI) comprise financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationships that could inappropriately influence or bias research work, editorial decisions, or peer reviews. Editors, reviewers, and authors must fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest. If a conflict of interest is identified, the involved party must recuse themselves from the respective editorial or review process.

10. Post-Publication Discussion

JURNAL RIPTEK welcomes constructive dialogue, scholarly feedback, and post-publication critiques regarding published articles. Readers and researchers may submit formal comments, letters to the editor, or critiques. Authors of the original article will be given a fair opportunity to respond to substantiated technical queries or discussions concerning their published work.

11. Correction and Retraction

When errors, inaccuracies, or ethical breaches are identified in published articles, the journal will apply the following mechanisms based on COPE guidelines:

• Correction (Erratum / Corrigendum): Issued when minor errors affect the publication record or scientific integrity in a traceable way without invalidating the core conclusions.
• Retraction: Issued for severe breaches such as major data fabrication, widespread plagiarism, unethical research, or redundant publication where the findings are rendered unreliable. Retracted articles remain accessible in the journal archive but are clearly marked as retracted.
• Expression of Concern: Issued by editors if they receive inconclusive evidence of research misconduct or ethical violations while an investigation is pending.

12. Ownership and Management Information

Journal Title: JURNAL RIPTEK

Ownership and Management: Badan Riset dan Inovasi Daerah Kota Semarang (Research and Innovation Agency of Semarang City)

Access URL: https://riptek.semarangkota.go.id/index.php/riptek