Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Allegations of Research Misconduct

Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) is an open-access, peer-reviewed journal. This statement clarifies the ethical conduct expected of all parties involved in publishing articles in this journal and in handling allegations of research misconduct, including authors, the editor-in-chief, associate editors, the editorial board, peer reviewers, and the publisher (Bali Sruti). This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of peer-reviewed articles in the Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) is an important foundation in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. 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 on standards of ethical behavior expected of all parties involved in the publication process: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the scholarly community. Bali Sruti, as the publisher of the Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS), takes its responsibility to oversee all stages of publication very seriously, and we recognize our ethical responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, or other commercial revenue do not affect or influence editorial decisions. In addition, Bali Sruti and the Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers when this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in the generation, conduct, or review of research by authors, or in the reporting of research results.
In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editor and Editorial Board will use COPE best practices to help resolve complaints and address misconduct fairly. The process will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editor. Submitted manuscripts found to contain misconduct will be rejected. If a published paper is found to contain misconduct, a retraction may be issued and linked to the original article.
The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also includes determining whether the person making the allegation has any relevant conflict of interest.
If there is a possibility of scientific misconduct or other substantial research irregularities, the corresponding author will be notified of the allegation on behalf of the co-authors and asked to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be undertaken. In cases where misconduct is unlikely, clarification and/or additional analysis provided by the authors in a written response to the editor may be sufficient and may include corrections to the published manuscript.
Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journal editors, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary action based on the evaluation of those concerns (for example, corrections, retraction with replacement, or retraction), the Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) will continue to fulfill its responsibility to ensure the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication Decisions
The Editor of the Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) 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 guide such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the journal’s editorial-board policies and constrained by legal requirements that must be observed regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult other editors or reviewers when making these decisions.

Complaints and Appeals
Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. Complaints will be clarified with the person concerned in relation to the claim. The scope of complaints includes anything related to journal management (for example, the editorial process, detected citation manipulation, unfair editors/reviewers, or peer-review manipulation). Complaint cases will be processed in accordance with COPE guidelines. Complaints should be sent by email to jipt@umm.ac.id.

Fair Play
An editor evaluates manuscripts based on their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, sex, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality
Editors and 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s written consent.

Duties of Authors
1.    Reporting Standards: Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed and 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.
2.    Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data related to a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, where practicable, and in any event should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for the reproducibility of the data.
3.    Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work and, if they have used the work and/or words of others, that these have been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.    Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: In general, an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5.    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.
6.    Authorship and Contribution to 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 made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors, and no inappropriate co-authors, are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7.    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.
8.    Fundamental Errors in Published Work: If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Duties of Reviewers
1.    Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper.
2.    Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a timely review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
3.    Confidentiality: Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4.    Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement based on previously reported observations or arguments should be accompanied by an appropriate 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.
5.    Disclosure and Conflicts 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 associated with the paper.

Duties of Editors
1.    Publication Decisions: Based on the review reports of the editorial board, the editor may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always guide such decisions. The editor may be guided by the journal’s editorial-board policies and constrained by applicable legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult other editors or reviewers when making these decisions. Editors must take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
2.    Manuscript Review: The editor should ensure that each manuscript is first evaluated by an editor to determine its originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and judiciously. Editors should explain their peer-review process in the information provided to authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
3.    Principle of Fairness: The editor should ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the author’s sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, and so on. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is to uphold the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in an influential position because they make decisions about publication; therefore, it is essential that the process be as fair and objective as possible.
4.    Confidentiality: The editor should ensure that information concerning manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring appropriate and adequately informed consent for the research presented, as well as consent for publication where applicable.
5.    Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the author’s written consent. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.

Ethical Oversight
If the research involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript in order to comply with research ethics involving animal and human subjects. Where required, authors must provide legal and ethical approval from the relevant association or legally authorized organization.
If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors must clearly justify this and state whether the data or information will be securely protected.
The Journal’s Intellectual Property (Copyright) Policy
can be viewed here:
https://jurnal.balisruti.org/index.php/JOHTAS/CopyrightNotice
Peer Review Process Policy. The peer-review process/policy is announced here:
https://jurnal.balisruti.org/index.php/JOHTAS/PeerReviewProcess

Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections
Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Sustainability (JOHTAS) welcomes discussion and corrections from readers regarding published articles. Readers may contact the Editor-in-Chief by email to raise concerns or discuss published reports. If accepted by the Editor-in-Chief, such discussions and corrections will be published in the Letters to the Editor section of our website. Authors may reply to/respond to readers’ discussions and corrections by sending a response to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor may then publish the response as a Reply to a Letter to the Editor.