Ethics

DENTIKA DENTAL JOURNAL: PUBLICATION CODE OF ETHICS

Scientific publication is a result from stages of creation process from individual or collective work of thought, to form of ideas and hypothesis, then executing them through researches; to produce a scientific work. After going through an extensive assessment, it will be issued publicly as scientific writing in a form of journals, books, proceedings, reports, papers or scientific posters.

The Code of Ethics of scientific publications is related to the performance of scientific research work in accordance with the ethical guidances of research and science. A good management of scientific publications must be supported by a thorough understanding of the researchers’ ethical code. In other words, the application of this Scientific Publication Code of Ethics to all components involved in the scientific publishing process is closely related and at the same time carrying out the research ethical code.

In order to maintain the quality of a manuscript and to avoid publication violation, it is important to draw up an agreed ethical standard to every individual involved in scientific publication. The scientific code of ethics is a statement of ethics from all parties involved in this scientific journal publication process, including:

Editorial Team, Editors, Peer Reviewers and Authors. Scientific Publication Code of Ethics essentially upholds three set of ethical values in Publishing, which obliged all involved in the publication process to be:

Neutral

That means, free from any conflict of interest in publishing any material.

Fair

That means every component of publication must have a fair justification in conducting their part as publisher, editors, peer reviewers and authors.

Honest

That means, free from fabrication, falsification plagiarism in publishing any materials.

By holding those three essentials ethical values, this Publication Code of Ethics will give guidance to authors, editors, editorial team and peer reviewers, in scientific journal publication system, to always abide the ethical codes, to follow the standards, and to acknowledge the responsibilities of a good publication management practices; as discussed in the following:

AUTHORS CODE OF ETHICS

Authors in a scientific journal are someone who pour their ideas, and/or researches and developments in forms of writing; that have meet the requirements of scientific principles and code of ethics. Research is aimed to acquire new knowledge, to increase the scientific treasures beyond the limits of known knowledge, or to produce scientifically resolving methods for problems at hand.

An author in a scientific journal is someone who pours out his/her thought and/or research in a scientific writing that has meet the requirements from scientific and ethical rules. Authors are obliged to follow paper authorship standards, to make a statement of authenticity, to detect the possibilities of manuscript being duplicated, to state sources of research funding.

The result of this process will become the author’s contribution to scientific knowledge. Authors work within ethical standards as follows:

Authors are obliged to make a declaration that the manuscript they have submitted is original, has never been published anywhere in any language, and is not under submission process in any other publishing.

Authors are collectively responsible the work and content of the manuscript, covering from methods, analysis, calculations and other details.

Authors are obliged to inform editorial team that their qualification and competence are corresponding with their article subject matter.

Authors that will send the manuscript and in contact with editorial team have to be the main author, so that corresponding will be easy if problem occurs.

Authors have to follow the style book constructed by Dentika Dental Journal.

If there is an error in the paper submitted, authors need to notify editorial team and publisher immediately.

If there are writing errors, authors need to request manuscript correction. Writing errors cover name spelling, affiliation writing, quotations and other mistakes that can mitigate the substance of the article.

Authors have the obligation to clearly and honestly present their manuscript as the result of their own ideas and researches, without any data fabrications, data falsifications and plagiarism.

Authors have the responsibility of authentication from their written manuscript.

Authors are obliged to show references from ideas and opinions quoted from other sources.

Authors are obliged to honestly responsibly and ethically prepare a manuscript, according to scientific writing regulations.

Authors must inform editorial team about the manuscript, whether it is a part of gradual research, and/or a multidiscipline work, and/or research with different theoretical perspective.

Team of authors have collective responsibility in the work and article contents that cover methodologies, analysis, calculation and its details.

Team of authors need to ensure that the names listed as authors, including the order of sequence, have corresponded with their contribution; and have been approved by the whole member of the team.

Addition, subtraction or changes in the list of authors, need to be negotiated first between all members. Authors must ensure that all non-substantive contribution in the paper will be acknowledged accordingly.

Authors must have no objections in case their manuscript were edited from examination and layout process, providing there are no alteration in substance and main ideas of the manuscript.

Authors must inform editorial team if authors are about to withdraw their articles.

When asked, authors are obliged to prepare subtstantial evidence that their paper have meet research code of ethics requirements, including preparing field notes or research log book.

Authors have to make an adequate response if there are comments and feedbacks from the published article.
Authors must not involve in plagiarism or self-plagiarism, and sliced publication is extremely prohibited in Dentika Dental Journal.

EDITORIAL TEAM CODE OF ETHICS

Editorial Team defines publication process and integrates roles of authors, editors and peer reviewers to produce a journal article guided by scientific rules and code of ethics. Journal management is an institution that publishes scientific articles of which have meet the requirements of scientific rules and code of ethics. Aside to publish and promote journals, Editorial team also need to protect intellectual property rights, and to maintain the publishing sustainability.

Editorial team main responsibilities are to create policy and publication programme, to facilitate editors and peer reviewers, to respect and value the decisions made by editors and peer reviewers. In publishing practises, editorial team are obliged to ensure that the publication has complied fully with the Scientific Publication Code of Ethics. Practises in relation with roles from Sponsors, it must be stressed out that sponsors and any other parties will not expect retribution of any kind, and will not influence any policy and programme from editorial team.

Editorial team is supposed to give honest feedbacks from critiques, opinions or rebuttals from authors. The Editorial team task is also to maintain the journal's independence from the concern of pure commercialization and keeps the journal remains the primary-classed journal in its field. Editorial Team works within ethical standards, as follows:

Editorial team is responsible for journal contents, and publication’s continual quality improvements.

Editorial team is obliged to construct writing guidlines and writing templates for authors

Editorial team have to assess critically and to determine whether a manuscript is honest, objective, and free from ethical violations.

Editorial team are obliged to value confidentiality for all parties involved, including contributed researchers, authors, editors and peer reviewers.

Editorial team has the responsibility to enforce the norms and clause to protect intellectual property rights, especially Copyrights.

Editorial team must assess each manuscript solely on their qualities regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, political ideology or affiliations. Any decision made has to be free from prejudice, including their decision to select peer reviewers.

Editorial team must give freedom to editors and peer reviewers in evaluating manuscripts. They also have to urge editors and peer reviewers to apply ethical clearance, including maintaining secrecy, liscencing and special requirements in researches on human, animals and other living being.

Editorial team must have a system to handle any kind of dispute and conflict of interest involving staff, authors, peer reviewers and editorial board members.
Editorial team has the authority to issue a manuscript after going through editing process, proofreading, layout setting, according to the principles of scientific journal publication

Editorial team needs to guarantee academical independence for editors and peer reviewers in performing their respective duties

Editorial team has the authority and obligation for maintaining privacy, protecting intellectual property, copyright and editorial freedom.

Editorial team has to guarantee that every manuscripts published have been reviewed by qualified peer reviewers.

Editorial team needs to ensure the feasibility of peer reviewers selected in accordance with their competence. Thus, the selected peer reviewers are those who can examine a scientific writing critically, transparently, and free from any conflict of interest.

Editorial team can decline a paper even before reviewing only because the paper has a low quality and/or is not corresponding with the journal’s scope; not because of author’s background and/or their affiliations.

Editorial team needs to ensure that the publisized researches are in accordance with scientific publication code of ethics issued by LIPI and other relevant international code of ethics.

Editorial team must provide ethical clearance and copyrights forms that are needed to be signed by authors.
Editorial team has the responsibility to publish the journal periodically, and to ensure the availability of monetary funds for publication sustainability, to develop working and marketing network, and to prepare liscenses and permits, and any other legal aspects.

EDITORS CODE OF ETHICS

An editor’s main task is to make publication decision. An editor is someone who can coordinate roles and tasks from authors, peer reviewers and editorial team in order to publish an article based upon scientific rules and code of ethics. Other than to make publication decisions, editors also have the responsibilities to regulate manuscript reviews, to regulate article conten confidentiality, and to ensure the team are free from misappropriating the manuscript.

Editor has to ensure reviewing and editing process to be conducted thoroughly, transparently, objectively and fairly. Such reasonings are needed in making decisions to determine whether a manuscript is accepted or not. Editors work within ethical standards, as follows:

Editorial team is responsible for journal contents, and publication’s continual quality improvements.

Editorial team is obliged to construct writing guidlines and writing templates for authors

Editorial team have to assess critically and to determine whether a manuscript is honest, objective, and free from ethical violations.

Editorial team are obliged to value confidentiality for all parties involved, including contributed researchers, authors, editors and peer reviewers.

Editorial team has the responsibility to enforce the norms and clause to protect intellectual property rights, especially Copyrights.

Editorial team must assess each manuscript solely on their qualities regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, political ideology or affiliations. Any decision made has to be free from prejudice, including their decision to select peer reviewers.

Editorial team must give freedom to editors and peer reviewers in evaluating manuscripts. They also have to urge editors and peer reviewers to apply ethical clearance, including maintaining secrecy, liscencing and special requirements in researches on human, animals and other living being.

Editorial team must have a system to handle any kind of dispute and conflict of interest involving staff, authors, peer reviewers and editorial board members.

Editorial team has the authority to issue a manuscript after going through editing process, proofreading, layout setting, according to the principles of scientific journal publication

Editorial team needs to guarantee academical independence for editors and peer reviewers in performing their respective duties

Editorial team has the authority and obligation for maintaining privacy, protecting intellectual property, copyright and editorial freedom.

Editorial team has to guarantee that every manuscripts published have been reviewed by qualified peer reviewers.

Editorial team needs to ensure the feasibility of peer reviewers selected in accordance with their competence. Thus, the selected peer reviewers are those who can examine a scientific writing critically, transparently, and free from any conflict of interest.

Editorial team can decline a paper even before reviewing only because the paper has a low quality and/or is not corresponding with the journal’s scope; not because of author’s background and/or their affiliations.

Editorial team needs to ensure that the publisized researches are in accordance with scientific publication code of ethics issued by LIPI and other relevant international code of ethics.

Editorial team must provide ethical clearance and copyrights forms that are needed to be signed by authors.
Editorial team has the responsibility to publish the journal periodically, and to ensure the availability of monetary funds for publication sustainability, to develop working and marketing network, and to prepare liscenses and permits, and any other legal aspects.

PEER REVIEWER CODE OF ETHICS

Dentika Dental Journal’s peer reviewers assist editorial team to substantially examine a manuscript according to their area of expertise. A peer reviewer is someone who assists editors to critically evaluate the substance of a scientific paper according to his/her area of expertise. On the broad scheme, peer reviewers serve to assist editors determining manuscript for publication and to help authors to improve the quality of their papers.

The task of a peer reviewer is to review both closedly or publicly, to check the strengths and correctness of data sources and references, the accuracy of concepts, and the objectivity of written content, and to conduct a neutral review. That is why peer reviewers hold an important part in scientific publication process. Peer reviewers work within ethical standards, as follows:

Peer reviewers have the task to assist editorial team in determining manuscript to publish, and at the same time also have the task to assist authors in improving the quality of their work.

Peer reviewers are required to be objective, honest, unbias, independent, and only stand beside scientific truth. Peer reviewers are also required to always uphold the basic principles and scientific analysis in performing the review process from a manuscript.

Peer reviewers are accountable for any recommendation from the manuscript they examined.

Peer reviewers have the obligation to conduct an objective examination supported by valid arguments, towards each manuscript they received.

Peer reviewers are obliged to evaluate the value of a manuscript critically.

Peer reviewers have to be constantly open minded to perceive something new.

Peer reviewers are responsible to examine every quotations and references; and to detect the possibility of data fabrications, data falsifications and plagiarism; from each manuscript they received. If writing error or writing digresses in references or quotation writing were found, peer reviewers need to inform editorial team so they can notify the author to make corrections according to peer reviewers’ note.

Peer reviewers must respond the paper sent by editorial team and work within the designated time-frame. If additional time is required in reviewing the manuscript, peer reviewers need to promptly report (and confirm) to editorial team’s secretariat.

The review result must be delivered objectively and honestly, supported by valid arguments. Some possible recommendation of review result for Dentika are:

Manuscript can be issued without changes
Manuscript can be issued with few improvements by Peer Reviewers. (Peer reviewers need to highlight revision in the text, and return the revised text to editorial team)
Manuscript can be issued with correction in format and language, by editor. (Peer reviewers need to write down if there was a particular substance that need to be fixed)
Author needs to make few corrections about some particular issue (Peer reviewers need to write them down).
Manuscript cannot be published (This can happen if the work is scientifically defective, or can have an adverse effect to society)

Peer reviewers have the obligation to protect confidentiality of the information from the manuscript they received, and they also have the obligation to not use such information for their own personal gain/interest.

Peer reviewers are required to obtain author’s permission in order to use some part of the manuscript. Peer reviewers are not allowed to distribute, circulate, broadcast nor publish the manuscript while being reviewed.

Peer reviewers shall ensure the principles of truth, novelty and authenticity; prioritise the benefits of writing for the development of science, technology, and innovation; and understand the impact of writing on the development of science.

Peer reviewers must not defend opinion of their own, authors or other parties that can result in recommending unobjective decision.

Peer reviewers must not be influenced by friendship, rivalry, or work partnership that can result in recommending unobjective decision.

Peer reviewers must be free from any intervention based on religions, political views, nationality, gender, commercial appeals and other relation that can result in recommending unobjective decision.

Peer reviewers need to comprehend above scientific publication code of ethics in order to avoid any conflict of interest, so that the publication process can run smoothly.

- Peer Review Process

Papers submitted to Dentika Dental Journal are subject to rigorous peer review so as to ensure that the research published is ‘good science’

Before the beginning of the refereeing process, manuscripts are initially screened by the editors. At this stage manuscript may be rejected directly by the editors if deemed to be beyond the scope of the journal, or scientifically or linguistically substandard.

Manuscripts that have successfully gone through the screening stage are then sent out for review electronically, and all correspondence takes place via email. Although the peer-review process is accelerated by the use of electronic communication, traditional, high quality peer-review standards are applied to all manuscripts submitted to the journal.

Each manuscript is sent to at least one independent referee. Dentika Dental Journal employs a ‘double blind’ review process: authors are not told who review their paper, and reviewers are not told who wrote the paper.

Peer reviewers are asked to give their opinion on a number of issues pertinent to the scientific and formal aspects of the paper, and to evaluate papers on grounds of originality, quality of empirical work and argument, quality of research methodology or/and argumentation and quality of written language. In addition, non-discriminatory language is mandatory sexist or racist terms should not be used, and their presence will result in immediate rejection by the editors. All relevant information will be forwarded to the author(s).

Reviewer Recommendation

Manuscript can be issued without changes.
Manuscript can be issued with few improvements by Peer Reviewers
Manuscript can be issued with correction in format and language, by editors.
Authors need to correct a few items in the manuscript
Manuscript cannot be issued.

When asking for revisions, reviewers have two possible goals: to ask authors to tighten their arguments based on existing data or to identify areas where more data are needed.

Please be aware that all peer-review reports and related correspondence will be archived by the publisher, via the publishing platform.

All the articles published in Dentika Dental Journal undergo full peer review, key characteristics of which are listed below:

All research articles are reviewed by at least one suitably qualified expert.
All publication decisions are made by the journal’s Editor-in-chief on the basis of the reviews provided.
Managing Editors and Editorials Assistants provide the administrative support that allows Dentika Dental Journal to maintain the integrity of peer review while delivering rapid turnaround and maximum efficiency to authors, reviewers and editors alike.