Journal of Basic Education Research is a peer-reviewed e-journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor-in-chief, the editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher (Cahaya Ilmu Cendekia Publisher). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and BERA Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (4th ed.).

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Journal of Basic Education Research is an essential building block in developing a coherent and respected knowledge network. It directly reflects the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Cahaya Ilmu Cendekia Publisher, as the publisher of the Journal of Basic Education Research, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Cahaya Ilmu Cendekia Publisher will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Journal of Basic Education Research 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 when making this decision.

Fair play

Editors should strive to ensure that peer review of their journals is fair, unbiased, and timely.

Confidentiality

Editors should have systems to ensure that material submitted to their journal remains confidential while under review.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

1. Editors should have systems for managing their own conflicts of interest and those of their staff, authors, reviewers, and editorial board members.
2. Journals should have a declared process for handling submissions from the editors, employees, or editorial board members to ensure unbiased review.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

1. Only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to conduct a proper assessment and which they can assess on time.
2. Acknowledge that peer review is essentially a reciprocal endeavor and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviewing and on time

Confidentiality

Respect the confidentiality of peer review and do not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review during or after the peer-review process beyond those released by the journal.

Standards of Objectivity

1. Not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender, or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations. 
2. They should be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libelous or derogatory personal comments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. 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 they know personally.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

1. Information obtained during the peer-review process should not be used for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage or to disadvantage or discredit others.
2. Declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, while editorial 'opinion' or perspective pieces should be identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review. They should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality and plagiarism

Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication

Papers describing the same research should not be published in multiple journals or primary publications. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript already published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behaviour and unacceptable.

The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

Authorship of the manuscript

Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number, if any).

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained while providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.
2. The confidential and anonymous treatment of human participants’ data is considered the norm for research. Authors should recognize the entitlement of both institutions and individual participants to privacy and should accord them their rights to confidentiality and anonymity. This could involve employing ‘fictionalising’ approaches when reporting, and when using such techniques, researchers should fully explain how and why they have done so. However, in some circumstances, individual participants, or their guardians or responsible others, may want to expressly and willingly waive their right to confidentiality and anonymity: researchers should recognize participants’ rights to be identified in any publication of their original works or other inputs if they so wish. This statement is based on the ethical guidance of privacy and data storage from BERA Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research (4th ed.).

Sources:

• ELSEVIER: Elsevier publishing ethics resource kit
• COPE: Responsible research publication: international standards for authors
• COPE: Cope's new code of conduct
• COPE: Responsible research publication: International standards for editors
• COPE: Cope short guide to ethical editing for new editors
• COPE: Cope ethical guidelines for peer reviewers
• COPE: The editorial board follows the guidelines for retracting articles issued by COPE
• COPE: Code of conduct for journal publishers
• COPE: Cope retraction guidelines