Publication Ethic

To preserve the quality of the manuscript as well as avoid plagiarism in the publication process, the editorial board sets the ethics of scientific Journal JTMIT publication. This publication ethics applies to writers/authors, editors, partners/ reviewers, and journal/editorial managers. The ethical rules of this publication apply to writers/authors, editors, reviewers, and managers of journals/editors. The ethics of the publication refer to The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)


Author’s Ethic

  1. Report; the author should inform the process and the result of the research to the editor fairly, distinctly, and comprehensively as well as keep the research data carefully and securely.
  2. Originality and plagiarism; the author should guarantee the manuscript is original work, originally written by the authors, and not other works/ideas. Authors are prohibited to write the references without using appropriate citations or quotations.
  3. Resubmission; the author must inform that the submitted manuscript has never been submitted/published in any other journals. If there is a case of resubmission of the manuscript to other publishers, the editorial board has the right to reject it.
  4. Status of the author; the author should inform the editors that the author has the competence or qualifications in certain areas of expertise that are in accordance with the field of published science, namely librarianship. The author who sends the script to the editor is the corresponding author (co-author) so that if a problem is found in the process of publishing the manuscript, it can be immediately settled.
  5. Errors in Manuscript Writing; the author should immediately inform the editor if there is an error in writing the manuscript, both the review of results and edits. The errors include writing names, affiliations/agencies, quotations/citations, and other writings that may affect the meaning and significance of the manuscript. If that happens, the author must immediately propose a repair of the manuscript. Disclosure and conflicts of interest; the authors should understand the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the text can be processed smoothly and securely.

Editorial Ethics

Publication Decision; the editor should ensure the reviewing process of the manuscript is entirely transparent, objective, fair, and prudent.  It fundamentally allows the editor to make a decision on the manuscript to be rejected or accepted.

  1. Publication Information; The editors should ensure that manuscript guideline for the authors and other parties is accessible and readable, both in print and online.
  1. Distribution of peer-reviewed scripts; the editor must ensure the reviewer and the manuscript the review, as well as inform the provisions and the review process of the script clearly to the reviewer.
  2. Objectivity and neutrality; the editor must be objective, neutral and fair in editing the manuscript, regardless to gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, class, and nationality of the author.
  3. Confidentiality; The editor must oversee any information, particularly information that corresponds to the privacy of the author and manuscript distribution.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest; The editor must comprehend publication ethics to avoid conflicts of interest with others. Therefore, the publication process may run smoothly and securely.

Reviewer Ethic

  1. Objectivity and neutrality; The reviewer must be fair, objective, unbiased, independent, and take a side with scientific truth. The process of reviewing the manuscript is carried out professionally, regardless to gender, business side, ethnicity, religion, race, class, and author's nationality.
  2. Clarity of reference sources; The reviewer must ensure that the source of the reference/quotation of the manuscript is appropriate and credible (can be accounted for). If errors or irregularities are found in writing the references/quotations, the reviewer must immediately inform the editor in order for it to be corrected by the author according to the notes from the reviewer.
  3. Peer-review effectiveness; The reviewer must respond to what has been sent by the editor and work in accordance with the predetermined peer review time (maximum 2 weeks). If additional time is required in reviewing the script, there should be an immediate confirmation to the editorial board.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest; The reviewer must comprehend the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties, so that the process of publishing the script run smoothly and securely.

Ethical for Journal Managing

  1. Decision making; The manager of the journal/editorial board must describe the mission and objectives of the organization, especially those relating to the establishment of policies and decisions of journal publishing without any particular interest.
  2. Deliberacy ; Journal managers must give freedom to reviewers and editors to create a comfortable work atmosphere and respect the privacy of the author.
  3. Guarantee and promotion; Journal managers must guarantee and protect intellectual property rights (copyright), as well as be transparent in managing funds received by third parties. In addition, the journal manager must publish and promote the results of publications by providing guarantees of benefit in the use of manuscripts.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest; Journal managers must comprehend the ethics of scientific publications above to avoid conflicts of interest with other parties so that the process of publishing the script goes smoothly and securely.