•  
  •  
 

Publication Ethics

Contents

Pscyhological Research on Urban Society (PRoUSt) is an open access peer-reviewed journal that follows the ethical guidelines of COPE's core practices on international scholarly publishing. PRoUSt adapts COPE’s core practices to meet high quality standard of ethics for publisher, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an essential issue, publication ethics needs to be explained clearly to improve the quality of the research worldwide. In this part, we explain the standard for editors, authors, and reviewers. In addition, publisher don’t have right to interfere with the integrity of the contents and only support to publish in timely manner.

Duties of Authors

    (based on COPE’s core practices on international scholarly publishing)

    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. A manuscript 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, Retention and Reproducibility

    Authors might be asked to provide the raw data in connection with the manuscript for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. The authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

    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 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 and Contributorship of the Article

    Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution on the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study, drafting or revising the article critically for important intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be published. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others 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 in the manuscript and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication. Order of authors should be a joint decision of the co-authors. Whenever possible, make these decisions before starting to write up the project. Some groups list authors alphabetically, sometimes with a note to explain that all authors made equal contributions to the study and the publication. If you do so, make sure it is clear to the editor in the cover letter. Change of authors order is not possible after the publication.

    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 Work

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

    { top }

Duties of Editors

    (based on COPE’s core practices on international scholarly publishing)

    Publication Decisions

    The editor of PRoUSt 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 be enforced not to conduct libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

    Complaints and Appeals

    PRoUSt has a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to the respective person concerning the claim. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal management (i.e., editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation). The complaint cases will be processed according to the COPE guideline. The complaint cases should be sent by email to [email protected].

    Fair play and Confidentiality

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

    The editor and editorial staff are prohibited from disclosing 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 an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

    { top }

Duties of Reviewers

    (based on COPE’s core practices on international scholarly publishing)

    Contribution to Editorial Decisions

    Peer reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

    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 him or herself from the review process.

    Confidentiality and Standards of Objectivity

    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. 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 is derived from the previously reported observation or argument should be accompanied by relevant citations. 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 handle 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 manuscripts.

    Plagiarism Screening

    At the initial screening upon submission, all manuscripts will be checked for similarity index using Ithenticate program. The maximum limit of similarity score is 20%, and the percentage of each similarity unit score should not reach more than 3%.

    { top }

Allegations of Misconduct

    What is Research Misconduct? Psychological Research On Urban Society (PRoUSt) takes publication ethics very seriously. Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • Fabrication:Making up data or results.
  • Falsification:Manipulating research materials, equipment, or changing data so the research is not accurate.
  • Plagiarism:Using another person’s ideas, words, or results without proper credit.
  • Citation Manipulation:Adding unnecessary citations to increase citation counts for personal gain.(Note: Honest errors or differences of opinion are not considered misconduct).

    • How to Report Suspected Misconduct (Whistleblower Policy)If you suspect any misconduct in a submitted manuscript or a published article in PRoUSt, please report it immediately to our Editorial Office via email at: [email protected]. All reports will be handled confidentially.

    Our Process for Handling AllegationsAs a journal that follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, our Editorial Board will take the following practical steps when receiving an allegation:

  • Initial Assessment:The Editor-in-Chief will first check if the report is valid and meets the definition of misconduct. We will also ensure the person reporting has no conflict of interest.
  • Author Communication:If there is potential misconduct, the Editor will contact the corresponding author to share the concern and request a detailed explanation.
  • Investigation:Based on the author's response, the Editor may involve external experts or consult the COPE flowcharts for guidance. If necessary, we may contact the authors' institutions or ethics committees to investigate further.
  • Final Action:

    • °For submitted manuscripts: The paper will be immediately rejected.

    °For published articles: PRoUSt will take necessary actions such as publishing a correction, a clarification, or a formal retraction linked to the original article, depending on the severity of the case.

    { top }

Authorship

    Psychological Research on Urban Society (PRoUSt) uses the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework to define authorship and ensure transparency in research contributions.

    Authorship Criteria

    To qualify as an author, an individual must have made a substantial intellectual contribution across one or more CRediT roles (such as Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, or Writing – Original Draft / Review & Editing) and approved the final manuscript for publication. Individuals who provided support only (such as funding acquisition, basic resources, or administrative help) should be recognized in the Acknowledgments section instead.

    Unethical Authorship Practices

    Ghost authorship (leaving out real contributors), guest/gift authorship (adding individuals without CRediT roles), and selling authorship are strictly prohibited.

    Author Contribution Statement

    PRoUSt requires all submitted manuscripts to include a dedicated Author Contribution section at the end of the draft before the References section. Authors must explicitly list each author's contribution using CRediT taxonomy roles (e.g., Author A: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis; Author B: Writing – Original Draft).

    Authorship Changes and Disputes

  • Changes After Submission: Any request to add, remove, or reorder author names must be submitted by the Corresponding Author with written consent from all co-authors explaining the reason. No authorship changes are permitted after acceptance.

  • Handling Disputes: PRoUSt handles authorship disputes according to COPE guidelines. The editorial team will not resolve internal disputes; conflicting claims must be resolved by the authors' affiliated institutions.

    • { top }

Complaints and Appeals

    Authors who have complaints or appeals regarding any aspect of the publication process should email the Editor-in-Chief of Psychological Research on Urban Society (PRoUS) at [email protected]. The journal will make every effort to acknowledge the complaint within seven days of receipt. The Editor-in-Chief will communicate directly with the complainant to outline the steps for resolving the issue, consulting with other members of the Editorial Board when necessary. All complaints and appeals will be processed fairly and transparently in accordance with COPE guidelines.

    { top }

Conflict of Interest

    A conflict of interest exists when financial or non-financial relationships (such as personal, professional, or institutional ties) could influence, or appear to influence, professional judgment in the publication process. Psychological Research on Urban Society (PRoUS) requires all authors, reviewers, and editors to disclose any potential conflicts transparently.

    For Authors

    All submitted manuscripts must include a "Conflict of Interest" section at the end of the text. Authors must list all financial and non-financial competing interests. If there is no conflict, the statement should read: "The author(s) declare(s) that they have no conflict of interest." At the end of the text, authors must also disclose all research funding sources under a separate "Funding Statement" section.

    For Reviewers

    Although PRoUS operates a double-blind peer review process, reviewers must still declare any potential conflicts of interest regarding the manuscript's topic. This includes having competing financial interests, direct academic rivalry, or currently working on a very similar research project that could affect their objectivity. If a conflict exists, the reviewer must declare it immediately upon invitation, and an alternative reviewer will be assigned.

    For Editors and the Journal

    Editors and journal staff must disclose any relevant conflicts of interest and step away from the decision-making process when a conflict exists. If a submitting author and an assigned editor have a relationship that may create bias, an alternative editor will be assigned to oversee the peer review process and make the final decision.

    Handling Conflicts of Interest

    PRoUS strictly follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to evaluate and resolve any cases of undisclosed or potential conflicts of interest, whether they are identified before or after the article is published.

    { top }

Data and Reproducibility

    Psychological Research on Urban Society (PRoUSt) encourages authors to provide supplementary materials, such as data sets and code, whenever it is appropriate for their research. PRoUSt policy encouraging the authors to share and make the data open is applicable only where this does not violate the protection of human subjects or other valid subject privacy concerns. PRoUSt policies on data and reproducibility are based on the COPE guidelines.

    { top }

Ethical Oversight

    If the research involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript to obey the ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal, ethical clearance from an association or legal organization.

    If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

    Because PRoUSt focuses on human behavior, mental health, and social dynamics in urban settings, ethical clearance is essential to protect research participants.

    Human and Animal Subjects and Vulnerable Populations

    Research involving human subjects—especially vulnerable urban populations such as children, marginalized groups, or victims of crime— or animal subjects, must be approved by recognized ethics committee. While our scope focuses on human or animal behavior in urban settings, any study involving human or animal subjects must also provide formal ethical clearance.

    Informed Consent and Publication

    Authors must obtain informed consent from all participants before the study begins. Furthermore, if the manuscript includes case studies, interviews, or any identifiable personal information, explicit written consent for publication must be obtained from the individuals involved to protect their privacy.

    Confidential Data and Ethical Practices

    Given our scope on organizational behavior, employment, and technology, research often involves sensitive corporate or digital data. Authors must follow ethical business and research practices by clearly explaining how they securely stored confidential data and protected the anonymity of organizations and individuals. All research must ensure that participants are safe from any psychological, social, or professional harm.

    { top }

Intellectual Property

    PRoUSt is committed to protecting intellectual property rights, maintaining academic integrity, and ensuring complete transparency in open-access publishing.

    Copyright and Licensing

    Author Ownership: Authors retain full copyright of their published work without restrictions.

    Licensing Terms: All articles in PRoUS are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This permits anyone to share, adapt, and build upon the work, provided the original author and source are properly cited.

    Licensing Details: Detailed licensing terms can be accessed here.

    Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

    Plagiarism & Turnitin Screening:

    Plagiarism is the use of another person’s ideas, data, or words without proper acknowledgment. Submitted manuscripts are screened using Turnitin software. Any text similarity exceeding 20% (excluding references and standard methodology) will be flagged for editorial review or rejection.

    Redundant or Overlapping Publication:

    Authors must present original, unpublished work. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously or republishing previously published findings without proper citation is considered misconduct.

    Publication Fees (Article Processing Charges - APC)

    This journal does not charge any author fees: Article Submission: 0.00 (IDR) Authors are not required to pay an Article Submission Fee as part of the submission process to contribute to review costs. Article Publication: 0.00 (IDR) If this paper is accepted for publication, you will not be asked to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.

    { top }

Journal Management

    Business Model and Funding Sources

    All journal operations, including our publishing software, website hosting, and publication costs, are entirely/ partially funded by our supporting institution, Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Indonesia. This financial support ensures the journal remains completely free for both authors and readers.

    Editorial Independence

    PRoUS strictly maintains editorial independence. Our funding sources and affiliated institutions have no influence over the editorial process. All decisions to accept, revise, or reject a manuscript are based solely on the scientific quality, originality, relevance to the journal's scope, and the results of the double-blind peer review.

    Editorial Board Management and Training

    Our Editorial Board consists of experts carefully selected based on their specific knowledge of psychology and social behavior. The roles and responsibilities of the Editorial Board and editorial staff are clearly defined to ensure a smooth publishing process.

    Advertising Policy

    To prevent any commercial influence on our publishing decisions, PRoUSt does not accept, display, or publish any advertisements on our website or within our journal articles.

    { top }

Peer Review Processes

    All submitted manuscripts in Psychological Research on Urban Society (PRoUSt) undergo a rigorous, transparent, and well-managed editorial workflow in accordance with COPE guidelines. The diagram below illustrates the manuscript's journey, which is governed by our comprehensive peer review policies detailed below.

    1. Submission and Initial Screening

    As shown in the workflow, all submissions first undergo an initial review screening and a similarity check using Turnitin. During this stage, any submitted supplementary materials (such as data sets or code) are also assessed and included in the subsequent peer review process to ensure they accurately support the manuscript.

    2. Reviewer Selection and Training

    Manuscripts that pass the initial screening proceed to the "Deciding Peer Reviewers" stage. PRoUSt selects at least two independent experts based on their specific research expertise. To ensure high-quality and consistent evaluations, we provide comprehensive training and instructions through our publicly available [Guidelines for Reviewers].

    3. Double-Blind Review, Confidentiality, and Conflicts of Interest

    During the "Manuscript Review" stage, PRoUSt strictly enforces a double-blind peer review process.

    Confidentiality: Reviews and authors are entirely anonymous in review stage. Furthermore, peer review reports remain strictly confidential and are never published alongside the final article.

    Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must objectively evaluate manuscripts and adhere to our [Conflicts of Interest Policy]. If a reviewer suspects the author's identity or has any competing interests, they must declare it and decline the assignment immediately.

    4. Revisions, Final Decisions, and Appeals

    The process from submission to a final decision typically takes 3 to 6 months, depending on the responsiveness of all parties during the "Revision" stages. The Editor makes the final decision (Accept, Revise, or Reject) based on reviewer feedback. Any disputes, conflicting reviewer advice, or formal author appeals regarding editorial decisions are handled transparently through our [Complaints and Appeals Policy] by contacting [email protected].

    { top }

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

    PRoUSt encourages transparent post-publication debate and is committed to maintaining the integrity of the academic record in accordance with COPE guidelines.

    Post-Publication Discussions

    Readers who wish to debate, raise concerns, or provide corrections regarding a published article can contact the Editor-in-Chief directly at [email protected].

    Corrections and Retractions

    If an error or ethical issue is identified after publication, PRoUSt will follow the standard COPE Retraction Guidelines:

  • 1. Corrections (Erratum/Corrigendum): For minor errors that do not affect the main conclusions of the research, a formal correction notice will be published. This notice will detail the error and be permanently linked to the original article.
  • 2. Retractions: If an article contains severe errors, fabricated data, or major ethical misconduct (such as plagiarism), it will be retracted. A clear retraction notice explaining the reasons will be published and bi-directionally linked to the original article. The original article will remain online but will be clearly marked as "Retracted."

    • { top }

AI Usage Policy

    Principle: AI may be used as an assistive tool under human supervision, but it cannot replace critical thinking. Authors, reviewers, and editors remain fully responsible for the content of their respective work.

    Author

  • 1. AI must not be listed as an author or co-author.
  • 2. Authors are permitted to use AI to assist in manuscript preparation (such as synthesizing literature, formatting, or refining language and grammar) provided that they verify all output generated by the AI.
  • 3. Authors must include an “AI Use Declaration” when submitting a manuscript. A template for this declaration can be found here: [AI Use Declaration Template]. Any substantive changes to sentence structure or the organization of the text must be declared.
  • 4. AI may be used to enhance image resolution, but this must be disclosed in the image caption. AI must not be used to create or alter images or primary research data.
  • If AI is used as part of the research methodology, it must be explicitly described in the "Method" section.

    • Reviewer

  • 1. Reviewers are prohibited from uploading the manuscript (in whole or in part) to any AI tool.
  • 2. AI may only be used as a supporting tool—for instance, to refine the language of a review report or to assist in literature searches via a private AI system.
  • 3. The use of AI must be disclosed in the review report, and the reviewer assumes full responsibility for its content.

    • Editor

  • Editors are prohibited from uploading manuscripts to AI tools outside of the journal’s official editorial system.
  • Editorial assessment and decision-making remain entirely in the hands of the editors.
  • AI may only be used as a supporting tool (e.g., for drafting decision letters) and must involve the use of a private AI instance.

    • Private AI Tools

    Tools that do not store, reuse, share, or learn from the content you input. Check their privacy policies and terms of service, and prioritize paid versions, enterprise-grade solutions, or locally-run models over free tools.

    { top }