Ethics and Malpractice

Table of Content

  1. Introduction
  2. Duties of Editors
  3. Duties of Riviewers
  4. Duties of Authors
  5. Authorship and Contributorship
  6. Complaints and Appeals
  7. Competing Interest
  8. Data Sharing and Reproducibility
  9. Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)
  10. Ethical Guideline
  11. Post-publication discussions and corrections

INTRODUCTION

Riset Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia is a blind-reviewed journal published periodically twice a year (April and September). The journal publishes papers in the field of accounting and finance that give significant contribution to the development of accounting practices and accounting profession in Indonesia.

The publication of an article in a blind-reviewed journal is an essential part of the development of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Blind-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the journal editor, the reviewer, and the author. These ethical guidelines are adopted from the publication ethics policy of Elsevier.

Duties of Editors

  1. Publication Decision
    2. The editor of the Riset Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work and its contribution to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
  2. Objective Assessment
    3. The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without having discrimination to religious belief, ethnic origin, gender, or citizenship of the author.
  3. Confidentiality
    4. The editor must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the editorial board, as appropriate.
  4. Conflicts of Interest
    5. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.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 blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves 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 institutions connected to the papers.
  5. Cooperation in Investigations
    6. The editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher. 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.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decision
    2. Blind review conducted by the reviewer 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.
  2. Promptness
    3. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor.
  3. Confidentiality
    4. 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.
  4. Objectivity
    5. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  5. Completeness and Originality of Sources
    6. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation 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.
  6. Conflicts of Interest
    7. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer'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. 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.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards
    2. 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.
  2. Data Access
    3. 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.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism
    4. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Self-plagiarism or auto-plagiarism is one type of plagiarism in which the authors use results or words from their own published articles without citing them appropriately.
  4. Standards of Paper Submission
    5. 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.
  5. Acknowledgement of Sources
    6. 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.
  6. Authorship of the Paper
    7. 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. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate 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.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
    8. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Authorship and Contributorship

This policy ensures that authors who have made substantial contributions to the intellectual content of an article are recognized and that they are cognizant of their obligations to assume responsibility for the published work.

Authorship

The following criteria are employed to ascertain authorship:

1. Making a substantial contribution to the concept or design of the work
2. Acquiring, assessing, or interpreting data for the purpose of the project
3. Writing the work or critically refining it to identify significant intellectual content
4. A commitment to take responsibility for all aspects of the work, including the final approval of the version to be published, and the assurance that any concerns regarding the integrity or veracity of any portion of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Submitting author

The submitting author is primarily responsible for submitting the article to the journal using our manuscript submission system and for communicating with the journal throughout the article submission, peer review, and revision process. They ensure that the journal's administrative obligations are satisfactorily fulfilled. These encompass, but are not restricted to, the collection of conflict of interest forms and statements, the provision of authorship details, the sanction of the ethics committee, and the documentation of clinical trial registration. Although one or more co-authors may delegate these responsibilities, the submitting author bears sole responsibility for them.
When submitting your article through our submission system, you must provide the name, email address, and institutional affiliation of all author contributors. The final published article will contain the author names, institutions, and addresses, which will be derived from the completed portions rather than the Word document that was submitted.
At the time of the research/article's composition, affiliations should correspond to the institutions in which the work was conducted. A confirmation email is sent to all author contributors immediately upon the submission of an article and the subsequent rendering of a final decision.

Corresponding author

The corresponding author is predominantly accountable for the completion of all necessary actions following the acceptance of the manuscript and for maintaining communication with the journal and readers after publication. The corresponding author will receive all communications from Reaksi. We maintain a single corresponding author in our system for the purpose of email correspondence and the publication of the article.

AI Authors

In the event that any content is submitted for publication, Reaksi will not acknowledge AI technologies as authors. Reaksi exclusively recognizes humans as capable of authorship as a result of their responsibility to be accountable for their work.

Alteration to Authorship

If their affiliation changed during the work, the author can identify their current affiliation, the affiliation at the time the work was conducted, or both. The acknowledgements section can provide further clarification regarding the change in affiliation.
The authorization of any change in authors that occurs after the initial submission and before publication is required from all authors. This pertains to amendments, deletions, changes in the order of the authors' names, or modifications to the attribution of contributions. If any modifications are made, the editor must be notified. The editor is authorized to contact any of the authors and contributors to ascertain whether they have given their consent to any modifications. 

Contributorship Statement

Contributorship statements must be included in all submitted articles, which should specify the individual contributions to the planning, execution, and reporting of the work described in the article. A contributorship statement should include authors, non-authors, and group authors (collaborators). The contributorship statement should offer a lucid account of contributors who have made substantial contributions to the paper but whose contributions do not warrant authorship.
This space is also the appropriate location to include contributions from participants or members of the public who have served as research volunteers, including their names and specific responsibilities. We strongly advocate for authors to include a comprehensive acknowledgement of the public and participants' contributions to their research, as appropriate.
To be included in the paper, all individuals named in the contributorship statement must grant permission, as readers may infer their endorsement of the data and conclusions. The author submitting the work bears the responsibility of obtaining permission and providing evidence if necessary.
The contributorship statement must explicitly identify the individual responsible for the overall content as the guarantor. Having access to the data and control over the publication decision, the guarantor assumes full responsibility for the completed work and the study's execution. 

Acknowledgements

The paper may end with an acknowledgments statement listing those who contributed to the research but were not recognized, as well as personal thanks. It is highly recommended that authors obtain permission from all acknowledged individuals before submitting to any Reaksi, as acknowledgment may be interpreted as endorsement of a study's data and conclusions by acknowledgment recipients.

Complaints and Appeals

For handling complaints concerning the journal, its editorial staff, editorial board, or its publisher, Reaksi shall have a well outlined system. Regarding the complaint situation, the complaints will be explained to respectable people. Any aspect of the journal business process might be the subject of a complaint, including the editing process, unethical editors/reviewers, peer review manipulation, and so on. According to COPE standards, the complaints will be addressed. For this reason, Reaksi has legal experts in the field of Intellectual Property rights as the Ethics Advisory Board.

Competing Interest

To make the most informed decision possible regarding the manuscript, the journal editor should be informed of any competing interests that the authors may have. We do not intend to eradicate competing interests, as they are virtually inevitable. We will not reject papers solely on the basis of the authors' competing interests; however, these interests will be disclosed in the publicly published paper. Authors are required to disclose the following information:
• Authors must disclose their associations with commercial entities that provided financial support for the research detailed in their submission.
• They must disclose any financial connections with their spouse or children under the age of 18.
• Any non-financial affiliations relevant to the submitted manuscript should also be considered.
• They should disclose any affiliations with commercial entities that could potentially have an interest in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Data Availability Statement

All research articles submitted to Reaksi are required to include a data availability statement. Authors are kindly asked to select at least one of the standardized Data Availability Statements text options below in bold as applicable upon submission and to provide supplementary information as specified in the guidance below. Authors may select multiple statements when data is accessible under various circumstances. These statements will be incorporated into the footnotes section of the final published article under the title "Data Availability Statement." The data is accessible through a public, open-access repository.
Kindly provide the name of the repository, the persistent URL, and any limitations on reuse (e.g., embargo, license). The text and reference list should cite all publicly available data used in an article, regardless of whether it was generated by the author(s) or other researchers. You can access the data upon reasonable request.
Please provide the following information: the nature of the data (e.g., deidentified participant data), the source from which it is available, the publishable contact details (e.g., a generic lab email address or an individual's ORCID identifier—please ensure you have permission), and the conditions under which reuse is permissible. Is there any additional information available, such as statistical analysis plans or protocols?
Data may be acquired from a third party and is not publicly accessible.
Please provide the following information: the nature of the data (e.g., deidentified participant data), the source from which it is available, the publishable contact details (e.g., a generic lab email address or an individual's ORCID identifier—please ensure you have permission), and the conditions under which reuse is permissible. Is there any additional information available, such as statistical analysis plans or protocols?
The article either contains all relevant data for the investigation or is submitted as supplementary information.

Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)

The journal's intellectual property or copyright policy is stated here.

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Riset Akuntansi dan Keuangan Indonesia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Ethical Guideline

Ethical Oversight

According to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), ethical oversight should include but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data and ethical business/marketing practices. The Reaksi is committed to considering appeals concerning our authors' non-observance of ethical principles.

Research Involving Human Subjects

When reporting studies that involve human participants, authors should include a statement that the studies have been approved by the appropriate institutional and/or national research ethics committee and have been performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1975 Declaration of Helsinki (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013, and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the 1975 Helsinki Declaration or comparable standards, the authors must explain the reasons for their approach and demonstrate that the independent ethics committee or institutional review board explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. At a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Ethical Approval’ of the article.

An example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before participating in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."

Use of Animals in Research

The welfare of animals used for research must be respected. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals have been followed and that the studies have been approved by a research ethics committee at the institution or practice at which the studies were conducted (where such a committee exists).

The Reaksi endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (https://arriveguidelines.org/arrive-guidelines) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers can use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at: https://arriveguidelines.org/resources/author-checklists.

Research Involving Cell Lines

Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines, the provenance should be stated, and references must also be given to either a published paper or a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.

Example of an ethical statement: "The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX, and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXX."

Research Involving Plants

Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild), including a collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the CBD (https://www.cbd.int/convention/) and the CITES (https://cites.org/eng).

For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants (other than, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oriza sativa, or many other typical model plants), voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened, or endangered species, this can be waived, but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.

Example of an ethical statement: "Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country)."

Post-publication discussions and corrections

Reaksi appreciates reader feedback and corrections on previously published articles. A reader has the option to submit an email to the editor-in-chief with comments and corrections regarding an article that has already been published. If accepted, the editor-in-chief will publish the comments and revisions as a letter to the editor in the subsequent edition. The editor in chief may be contacted by esteemed writers to respond to suggestions from readers and revisions. If appropriate, the response may be published as a response to a letter to the editor.