Publication Ethics

The AJIE is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. This ethical statement binds the behavior of the author, the editor, reviewers and the publisher. This statement is based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of AJIE is a significant contribution to innovation research from both science and technology perspectives, especially for emerging market economics and entrepreneurial issues. The articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for the author, the editor, the peer reviewer, and the publisher.


As publishers, Universitas Islam Indonesia takes its stewardship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we are aware of our ethical and other responsibilities. 


AJIE is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.


Duties of authors


The authors should include a reliable and accurate version of the working paper, as well as an explanation of its significance. The article's data should be accurately reported. A paper must contain sufficient detail and pertinent references. False or inaccurate statements encourage unethical behavior, which is unacceptable.



The AJIE may ask the authors to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review or for public access or retention purposes.


When referencing the work of others, authors must ensure that they properly cite and quote. Plagiarism in any form, from "passing off" another author's paper as one's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of another author's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from other people's research, is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.


In essence, an author is strictly prohibited from simultaneously publishing manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. This is unethical publishing behavior and is completely unacceptable.


The author should properly acknowledge the work of others. Authors should cite publications that influenced the reported work's nature. Without the source's explicit, written permission, information obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported. Without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services, information obtained during confidential services such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications may not be used.



Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution only to the paper. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The others should be acknowledged properly. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.


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.


All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts 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 that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications and registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.


When an author discovers a material error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's responsibility to notify the journal editor or publisher promptly and to cooperate with the editor in retracting or correcting the paper. If an editor or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author is required to promptly retract or correct the paper or to provide evidence to the editor establishing the original paper's correctness.


Duties of editors


The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which articles should be published in the journal, frequently in collaboration with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). Such decisions must always be motivated by the validation of the work in question and its significance to researchers and readers. The editor may be guided by the journal's editorial policies and constrained by any applicable legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism at the time. This decision may be made in consultation with other editors, reviewers, or society officers.


An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


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.



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 members 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.



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 to 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 behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.


Duties of reviewers


Editors are assisted by peer reviewers to decide the editorial aspects as well as for improving the quality of the papers.


Whenever the appointed reviewer is not able to review because of unqualified reason or unable to response promptly so he or she should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


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.



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


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.



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.

**This publication ethics are mostly derived, adapted from copied from Geoadria Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.