International Review of Humanities Studies
Publication Ethics Statement
Publication Ethics
This journal is published in English twice a year, namely in January and July, by the Faculty of Humanities Universitas Indonesia. IRHS welcomes articles on education and teaching. All articles to be submitted must be written in English. All parties involved in the publishing process including: author, journal editors, peer reviewers, and publisher should adhere to the publication ethics guidelines described below.
The following statements which are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors clarify ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in IRHS. AUTHORS Reporting Standard
Authors are expected to have made reasonable attempts to check and validate results submitted to the journal for publication. Authors should provide real and authentic research data. Authors should confirm that the journal is not published in another journal. Authors are required to cite the sources correctly by considering the content of the manuscript either in the form of written publications and personal interviews. Originality and plagiarism
The authors should confirm 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 Authors should not submit or publish the same manuscript to more than one journal or primary publication. 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 research. All those who have made 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. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to keep such data for a reasonable time after publication. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper. EDITORS Fair Play
An editor assesses manuscripts based only on the originality and the quality of the paper and should not be affected by the religious, national, political or any other influences. Confidentiality
The editors 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. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in editors' own research without the express written consent of the author. PEER 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 to give proper assessment and judgement of the submitted paper. Reviewers should immediately inform the editor if any form of plagiarism is identified within submitted work. 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 editors 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. The reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting rationale arguments. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should point out on relevant published work which is not cited in the article. 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 with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers. 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 to give proper assessment and judgement of the submitted paper. Reviewers should immediately inform the editor if any form of plagiarism is identified within submitted work. 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 editors 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. The reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting rationale arguments. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should point out on relevant published work which is not cited in the article. 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 with any of the authors or institutions connected to the papers.
