Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

I. INTRODUCTION

Publishing in a peer-reviewed journal is a cornerstone of scientific progress, reflecting the quality of the authors' work and their supporting institutions. Peer-reviewed articles uphold the scientific method, requiring ethical behavior from all parties involved: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and sponsoring societies.

The following statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in publishing an article in this journal, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher (Indonesian Chemical Society, Chapter Nusa Tenggara). This policy aligns with the latest COPE Core Practices and serves as a reference to ensure integrity, transparency, and accountability in the publication process.

II. DUTIES OF EDITORS

II.1. Publication decisions

Editors of peer-reviewed journals are entrusted with making publication decisions based on the scholarly merit, originality, and relevance of submitted articles to the journal's scope and readership. These decisions are guided by the journal's editorial policies, ethical standards, and applicable legal requirements, including those concerning libel, copyright, and plagiarism. Editors work collaboratively with reviewers, other editorial board members, and, where applicable, society representatives, ensuring an objective and transparent evaluation process that upholds the integrity of the scientific record.

II.2. Fair play

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely based on their intellectual merit, originality, and relevance to the journal's scope, without bias toward the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or political beliefs. This commitment to fairness ensures an equitable and inclusive scholarly process that upholds the integrity of academic publishing.

II.3. Confidentiality

The editor 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.

II.4. 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Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.

II.5. Involvement and cooperation in investigations

An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

III. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

III.1. 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 in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Acta Chimica Asiana shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

III.2. 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 himself from the review process.

III.3. 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.

III.4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

III.5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. 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.

III.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewers own research without the express written consent of the author. 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 connected to the papers.

IV. DUTIES OF AUTHORS

IV.1. 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. 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 clearly identified as such.

IV.2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper 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.

IV.3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. If they have used the ideas, data, or words of others, proper citation or quotation must be provided. Plagiarism, in any form—whether by presenting someone else's work as their own, copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of another’s work without proper attribution, or claiming others' research results—constitutes unethical behavior and is strictly prohibited in academic publishing.

IV.4. 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 concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided 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.

IV.5. Acknowledgement 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. 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. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

IV.6. 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 study. 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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

IV.7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance 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.

IV.8. 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. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

IV.9. Fundamental errors in published works

When an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they are obligated to promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and collaborate to issue a retraction or correction. Similarly, if the editor or publisher is made aware by a third party of a potential error, the author must respond swiftly by retracting or correcting the paper or providing evidence to support the accuracy of the original work. This process ensures the integrity and reliability of the scholarly record.

 ---------------------

Dr.rer.nat. Lalu Rudyat Telly Savalas

Editor-in-chief

Acta Chimica Asiana