Publication Ethics
JDEP (Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan) promotes responsible research, fair editorial assessment, and transparent scholarly communication. This policy establishes ethical standards for authors, reviewers, editors, editorial staff, and the publisher throughout submission, peer review, and publication.
JDEP follows the principles outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and supports their consistent application throughout scholarly publishing. This policy also draws on Emerald Publishing’s publication ethics guidance, adapted to JDEP’s editorial procedures.
The policy applies to regular articles, special issues, and other scholarly contributions. JDEP remains responsible for its policies and editorial decisions.
1. DUTIES OF EDITORS
Publication Decisions
Editors are responsible for deciding which submissions proceed to peer review and which articles are accepted for publication. Decisions must consider the journal’s scope, originality, methodological quality, clarity, contribution, and the reliability of the findings.
Editors may consult reviewers and other editors while retaining responsibility for the final decision. Decisions must also take account of applicable requirements concerning copyright, plagiarism, privacy, and defamatory content.
Fair Assessment
Editors assess manuscripts on their scholarly merit without discrimination based on an author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.
Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions must remain independent of publication charges, funding arrangements, commercial interests, and inappropriate external influence. Payment does not guarantee acceptance.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must protect information about submitted manuscripts. Access is limited to individuals who require it for legitimate editorial purposes, including the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Confidential information must not be disclosed or used for personal advantage.
Conflicts of Interest
Editors must disclose relevant competing interests and withdraw from handling manuscripts where impartiality could be compromised.
A submission authored or co-authored by an editor must be handled by another editor without the relevant conflict. The author-editor must not participate in reviewer selection, assessment, or decision-making for that submission.
Unpublished material must not be used in an editor’s own research without the author’s express written permission.
Oversight of Special Issues
Special issues must follow the journal’s ethical standards and review procedures. Guest editors must disclose conflicts of interest, protect confidentiality, and remain subject to journal oversight.
2. DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers assist editors by evaluating the scholarly quality of manuscripts. Their comments should help authors improve the accuracy, clarity, and completeness of their work.
Reviewers must distinguish essential revisions from optional suggestions and support their recommendations with clear reasoning.
Expertise and Timeliness
Reviewers should accept assignments only when they have appropriate expertise and can complete the review within the agreed period. They must promptly inform the editor if they cannot undertake or complete the review.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share them or involve another person in the review without prior editorial permission. Any authorised assistance must be disclosed to the editor.
Objectivity and Respect
Reviews must address the manuscript rather than the personal characteristics of its authors. Comments must be constructive, respectful, and supported by evidence. Personal attacks and discriminatory remarks are unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant omissions in the literature and alert editors to substantial overlap with other work. Suggested references must have a clear scholarly justification.
Reviewers must not require irrelevant citations to their own work, the journal, or another publication as a condition of a favourable recommendation.
Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose relationships or interests that could affect impartiality, including relevant collaborations, competition, institutional relationships, or financial interests. They should decline the assignment where an objective assessment cannot be provided.
Unpublished material and ideas obtained through review must not be used for personal advantage or incorporated into the reviewer’s research without appropriate written permission.
Reporting Concerns
Suspected plagiarism, data irregularities, ethical problems, or other misconduct must be reported confidentially to the editor. Reviewers must not independently contact authors or publicly disclose allegations.
3. DUTIES OF AUTHORS
Accurate Reporting
Authors must present an accurate account of the research and an objective discussion of its significance. Findings must be distinguished from interpretation, and limitations must be acknowledged.
Methods, data processing, statistical exclusions, missing-data treatment, and relevant analytical decisions must be reported sufficiently to allow assessment and, where feasible, replication.
Fabrication, falsification, and knowingly misleading statements are unacceptable.
Originality and Attribution
Authors must submit original work and acknowledge the ideas, words, data, instruments, tables, and figures of others. Direct quotations must be clearly identified and cited.
Authors must obtain permission for third-party material where required and provide appropriate source information in table and figure captions.
Multiple, Redundant, and Concurrent Publication
The same manuscript must not be submitted to more than one journal simultaneously. Authors must disclose related publications and explain overlapping content.
Previous dissemination through a thesis, preprint, conference presentation, or proceedings must be declared at submission. Editors will assess its implications for originality, copyright, and the manuscript’s contribution.
Authorship and Contributorship
Each author must have made a substantial contribution to the research, participated in drafting or substantive revision, approved the final manuscript, and agreed to accountability for the work.
The corresponding author must ensure that all eligible authors are included, that no inappropriate authors are listed, and that all authors approve submission.
Each manuscript must include an author contribution statement. Administrative position, seniority, funding acquisition, or general supervision alone does not justify authorship. Other contributions should be acknowledged with the contributor’s permission.
Changes to authorship require a reasoned explanation and written agreement from all affected authors. Processing may be paused while a dispute remains unresolved. Unresolved contribution disputes may be referred to the relevant institution.
Funding and Competing Interests
Authors must disclose all funding sources and relevant financial or non-financial interests. Where applicable, the funder’s role in study design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions must be described.
A conflict-of-interest declaration is required even when no conflict exists.
Errors and Cooperation
Authors must promptly notify the editor or publisher when they discover a material error in submitted or published work. They must cooperate with reasonable requests for clarification and with appropriate correction or retraction procedures.
4. PLAGIARISM SCREENING AND CITATION ETHICS
JDEP screens submissions using Turnitin, with a maximum similarity threshold of 20%.
A similarity score below this threshold does not establish originality or guarantee acceptance. Editors assess the nature, sources, extent, and context of overlap. Plagiarism may lead to rejection regardless of the overall score.
References must be accurate, relevant, and consulted by the authors. Citation manipulation, including unjustified self-citation, coercive citation, and coordinated citation inflation, is unacceptable.
Authors may explain why a suggested reference is not relevant. Such disagreement must not, by itself, prejudice the editorial decision.
5. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Permitted Assistance
Generative AI may be used to edit or translate authors’ existing original text, provided authors verify the output and transparently disclose the use.
Prohibited Uses
Generative AI must not write new manuscript content or fabricate research evidence. AI-generated material must not be presented as observations collected from actual participants, organisations, or other empirical sources.
AI tools cannot qualify as authors.
Clearly identified AI outputs used as objects of research or scholarly critique require an appropriate methodological explanation and editorial assessment.
Disclosure and Accountability
Authors must provide a Declaration of AI Use before the References, identifying the tool, its version where available, its purpose, and the sections affected. Relevant methodological uses must also be explained in the Methods section.
Authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, references, and the integrity of their work. Disclosure does not make prohibited use acceptable.
Editorial and Review Confidentiality
Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential submissions to generative AI services or delegate scholarly assessment or editorial decisions to them.
Language editing of review reports must preserve confidentiality and be disclosed to the editor.
AI detection results are screening aids. A detection score alone is insufficient to establish misconduct.
6. ETHICAL APPROVAL, INFORMED CONSENT, AND PRIVACY
Research involving participants or identifiable personal information must describe applicable ethical requirements and safeguards.
Where required, ethical approval must be obtained before the research begins. Authors must identify the approving committee, reference number, and approval date. An authorised exemption must be accurately documented.
Where approval is not required, authors must explain the basis under applicable institutional requirements. Approval, exemptions, and consent must never be claimed unless actually obtained.
Participation must be voluntary and based on adequate information about the study, foreseeable risks, confidentiality, and data use. Authors must explain how informed consent was obtained or report an authorised waiver.
Organisational permission does not automatically replace individual consent. Particular safeguards are required for vulnerable participants and situations involving dependency or unequal power.
Authors must protect identities and confidential information. Publication of identifiable quotations, photographs, or case descriptions requires appropriate publication consent.
7. DATA ACCESS, RETENTION, AND REPRODUCIBILITY
Authors must retain supporting data and research records for a reasonable period after publication, consistent with institutional requirements, consent conditions, and applicable obligations.
Editors may request data, code, instruments, or documentation for assessment or investigation. Any access arrangements must respect legitimate confidentiality and ownership restrictions.
Research articles must include a Data Availability Statement explaining where supporting data can be accessed or why access is restricted.
Where feasible, authors should provide variable definitions, analytical code, and documentation sufficient to understand the analysis. Third-party data must follow the provider’s conditions.
Authors must not promise access they cannot provide. Public sharing is not required where it would breach participant consent, privacy, confidentiality, or legitimate restrictions.
8. INTEGRITY OF FIGURES AND RESEARCH MATERIALS
Tables, figures, images, and supplementary materials must accurately represent the research.
Alterations must not conceal information or create a misleading impression. Relevant processing and adjustments must be explained where necessary.
Simulated data must be clearly labelled and distinguished from empirical observations. Authors should retain original materials needed to verify reported findings.
9. COMPLAINTS, APPEALS, AND MISCONDUCT REPORTS
Concerns should be submitted through the official editorial contact on JDEP’s Contact page. Reports should identify the manuscript or article, explain the concern, and provide supporting evidence.
The journal distinguishes complaints about editorial procedures, appeals against decisions, and allegations of misconduct. Appeals should identify a substantive error, procedural concern, or relevant evidence requiring reconsideration.
A person directly implicated in a complaint must not be its sole assessor. Cases involving the Editor-in-Chief will be referred to an appropriate independent editor or publisher representative.
Relevant parties will have an opportunity to respond. The journal will communicate the outcome and explain material delays. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance or another round of review.
Where necessary, the journal may seek clarification or investigation from the relevant institution.
10. CORRECTIONS AND POST-PUBLICATION ACTION
Readers and authors may report errors or concerns about published articles. The journal will assess their effect on the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record.
Depending on the evidence, action may include a correction, an expression of concern, or retraction. Notices will explain the reason and remain linked to the article.
Retraction serves to correct the scholarly record. Removal of published content will be considered only in exceptional circumstances involving serious harm or applicable obligations.
11. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PUBLISHER
The publisher supports editorial independence, appropriate handling of integrity concerns, and preservation of the scholarly record.
The publisher must not pressure editors to accept manuscripts for financial or institutional advantage. It will cooperate with editors in addressing substantiated concerns and implementing appropriate post-publication action.
12. IMPLEMENTATION AND POLICY REVIEW
Article declarations include author contributions, funding, conflicts of interest, AI use, data availability, and research ethics, as applicable.
The journal may request supporting documents during assessment or investigation. Decisions will consider the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, and relevant guidance.
This policy will be reviewed periodically. Material revisions and their effective dates will be displayed on the journal website.
Further Information
For questions about this policy, please contact the editorial office through JDEP’s Contact page.
Policy References
