Tuhenori: Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin is a peer-reviewed journal published periodically, four times a year (December, March, June, and September). Tuhenori publishes scientific articles in Computer Science, Sociology, Psychology, Management, Economics, Biology, Mathematics, Education, Health, Law, Philosophy, Agriculture, and various other branches of science.
Publishing peer-reviewed journals is essential to scientific development - articles from peer-reviewed support embodying a scientific approach. Therefore, there must be standards of ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing, such as journal editors, reviewers, and authors. This guide was adopted based on Elsevier's publication ethics policy and COPE’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Tuhenori editors guarantee that all procedures are directed merely to facilitate an objective and intellectual treatment. Further, the editors and reviewers evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or specific political and group interests. Software is used to avoid plagiarism in the articles.
Duties of Editors
Tuhenori Editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. This decision is based on validation of the paper and the article's contribution to researchers and readers. In carrying out its duties, the Editor is guided by the editorial board's policy and is subject to legal provisions that need enforcement, such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor can discuss the decision with the editor or other reviewers.
Tuhenori Editor ensures that the peer-review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Articles to be published in the Tuhenori will be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and if necessary, additional opinions will be sought. For this purpose, editors choose reviewers with the appropriate expertise in the relevant field and must follow best practices to avoid fraudulent peer reviewer selection. The editor will also review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation by reviewers to determine whether there is a potential bias.
Tuhenori editors should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The journal's editorial policy should encourage transparency and reporting that is complete and honest, and editors must ensure that peer reviewers and authors clearly understand what is expected of them. The editor shall use a standard electronic journal submission system for all communications.
The Tuhenori editor shall protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed upon with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Declaration of Competing Interests
Any potential editorial conflict of interest should be disclosed to the publisher in writing before the editor's appointment and updated if and when new conflicts arise.
Tuhenori editors may not be involved in decisions about papers written by themselves, by family members or colleagues, or related to the editor's products or services of interest. Furthermore, each submission must be subject to all the usual journal procedures. The relevant authors/editors and their research groups must handle peer reviews independently. There must be a clear statement of this effect in published papers.
Vigilance over the Published Record
Tuhenori's editor should work to maintain the integrity of the published records by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected violations (research, publication, review, and editorial) with the publisher.
Such measures will generally include contacting the manuscript's author and considering the individual complaint or claim made, but may also have further communication with relevant institutions and research bodies. The editor shall further make appropriate use of the publisher’s systems to detect misconduct, such as plagiarism.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is essential to formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are generally asked to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and observe proper reviewing etiquette.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.
Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises. Still, reviewers should discuss this with the editor to ensure confidentiality and that participants receive suitable credit.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Alertness to Ethical Issues
A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and bring these to the editor's attention, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.
Standards of Objectivity & Competing Interests
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper with potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Suppose a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s or their associates’ work. In that case, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the reviewer’s citation count or enhance the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).
Duties of Authors
Authors of reports of original research 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.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be identified as such.
Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their paper for editorial review or comply with the journal's open data requirements. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should be designed to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication.
Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted, and permission has been obtained where necessary.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and provide the appropriate context within the more considerable scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), and claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism, in all its forms, constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
An author should not generally 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 behavior and is unacceptable.
Generally, an author should not submit a paper published previously for consideration in another journal except as an abstract, as part of a published lecture or academic thesis, or as an electronic preprint.
Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in multiple journals is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, reflecting the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary paper.
Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the author's explicit written permission of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper (e.g., language editing or medical writing), they should be recognized in the acknowledgments section.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper. All co-authors have seen and approved the article's final version and agreed to its publication submission.
Authors are expected to carefully consider the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission.
Authors take collective responsibility for the work. Each author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify them in the manuscript. Suppose the work involves animal or human subjects. In that case, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.