Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Allegation of Research Misconduct
Industrial Innovation recognizes the significance of ethical principles in academic publishing and is dedicated to upholding a high standard of ethical behavior. To ensure transparency and ethical conduct throughout the publication process, Industrial Innovation adheres to rigorous peer-review standards. In line with the COPE Best Practice Guidelines, this publication ethics statement establishes clear expectations for all stakeholders, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher (Politeknik ATK Yogyakarta). With this ethical policy serving as a valuable guide, Industrial Innovation aims to promote publication ethics and prevent malpractice among all stakeholders of the journal.

Publisher Commitment to Ethical Publishing
The publication of a peer-reviewed article in Industrial Innovation is a vital component in creating a reputable and coherent knowledge network. It reflects the quality of the author’s work and the institutions that support them, while upholding the scientific method. Thus, it is crucial to establish ethical standards for all parties involved in the publishing process, including the author, editor, peer reviewer, publisher, and society.
As the publisher of Industrial Innovation, Politeknik ATK Yogyakarta recognizes its duty to oversee all stages of publishing and acknowledges its ethical and other responsibilities. It is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions remain independent and unbiased, unaffected by commercial revenue from advertising, reprints, or other sources. Additionally, the Industrial Innovation Editorial Board and Politeknik ATK Yogyakarta will facilitate communication with other publishers or journals as needed and appropriate.

Allegation of Research Misconduct
Research misconduct refers to several actions, such as fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, and plagiarism, that can occur during the production, performance, review, or reporting of research and the writing of articles. Editors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record, particularly when articles that have been published are involved in such irregularities.

To address any suspicions of misconduct fairly, editors and editorial boards follow the best practices of COPE, including investigations of allegations made by individuals with no relevant conflicts of interest. If misconduct is suspected, the corresponding author is contacted to provide a detailed response, and additional review and involvement of experts, such as statistical reviewers, may be sought.
When there is sufficient evidence of misconduct, submitted manuscripts are rejected, and published papers may be retracted, with a link provided to the original article. However, for cases where misconduct is unlikely, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor and often accompanied by a correction notice, may suffice.
Politeknik ATK Yogyakarta is expected to conduct thorough investigations of allegations of scientific misconduct. It is the critical responsibility of authors, journals, and institutions to guarantee the accuracy of the scientific record. Industrial Innovation will continue to fulfill its responsibilities by responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct and taking necessary actions, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, or retractions, to maintain the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Authorship and Contributorship
Authors should ensure that the authorship of their research publications accurately reflects the contributions made by each individual involved in the work and its reporting. Only those who have significantly contributed to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study should be listed as authors. Others who have made substantial contributions must be acknowledged as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors, those who have made less substantial or purely technical contributions should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors must also confirm that all authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.

Complaints and Appeals
Industrial Innovation has a well-defined process for managing grievances lodged against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. Complaints will be thoroughly explained to the concerned individual regarding their nature and scope. The scope of complaints covers any issue related to the journal’s operations, such as the editorial process, unethical citation practices, biased editors/reviewers, or peer-review tampering. All complaint cases will be handled in compliance with COPE’s guidelines.

Data Access, Retention, and Reproducibility
To uphold research integrity and transparency, authors are strongly encouraged to provide the raw data used in their study to the editorial team during the review process. Authors should also be willing to make this data publicly available, where feasible, or retain it for a reasonable period following publication. It is the author’s responsibility to ensure that their data can be reproduced, thereby allowing other researchers to verify and build upon their findings.

Ethical Oversight
When conducting research involving potentially hazardous chemicals, procedures, equipment, humans, or animals, the author must disclose these hazards in the manuscript to comply with ethical research practices. Additionally, if necessary, authors must obtain legal ethical clearance from relevant associations or organizations. For research involving confidential data or business/marketing practices, authors must explain how they will securely protect the data or information.

Duties of Authors
1. Reporting Standards: Authors must report research accurately and honestly, without manipulation or falsification of data. Manuscripts should provide sufficient detail and references to allow replication. Fraudulent or inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure their work is original and not under consideration elsewhere. Previous work must be properly acknowledged and cited. Direct quotations should be appropriately referenced.
3. Multiple or Redundant Publications: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal or publish redundant manuscripts describing the same research. Multiple publications from a single research project should be identified as such, and the primary publication must be cited.
4. Acknowledgement of Sources: All sources of data must be acknowledged, and relevant publications properly cited.
5. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Authors must declare financial or other conflicts of interest that could affect the results or interpretation of the manuscript, as well as all sources of financial support.
6. Errors in Published Works: If an author discovers a major error in their published work, they must immediately notify the editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the article.

Duties of Editors
1. Publication Decisions: Editors decide whether to accept, reject, or request revisions based on reviewers’ reports and the importance and validity of the work. Decisions must comply with legal requirements regarding plagiarism, copyright infringement, and libel.
2. Manuscript Review: Editors must ensure fair, unbiased, and timely peer review. Reviewers must be selected for their expertise and absence of conflicts of interest.
3. Fairness: Manuscripts must be evaluated solely for intellectual content, regardless of authors’ gender, race, religion, or citizenship.
4. Confidentiality: Editors must maintain confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. Informed consent and proper data protection must be upheld.
5. Conflicts of Interest: Editors must not use unpublished material from a submitted manuscript for their own research without written consent from the author.

Duties of Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers assist editors in making publication decisions and may provide constructive feedback to authors.
2. Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review must remain confidential.
3. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should verify proper citation of sources and inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism or ethical concerns.
4. Objectivity: Reviews should be impartial, constructive, and clear.
5. Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should avoid reviewing manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist.
6. Promptness: Reviewers should respond to invitations promptly and complete reviews within agreed timelines.

Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)
This journal’s copyright and intellectual property policy is formally declared here.

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections
Industrial Innovation welcomes post-publication discussions and corrections from readers regarding published articles. Readers may contact the Editor-in-Chief via email with their feedback. If accepted, discussions and corrections will be published in the next issue as a Letter to the Editor. Authors of the original article may respond, and their reply may be published as a Response to the Letter to the Editor.

Peer-Review Process Policy
The peer-review process ensures that submissions are evaluated for novelty, objectivity, methodology, scientific impact, conclusions, and references. Reviewers’ comments are shared with the corresponding author for revision and response. The Editorial Board will then make the final decision based on reviewers’ recommendations.

Plagiarism Screening Policy
Industrial Innovation has a strict policy against plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Papers found to contain such issues will be investigated and rejected. The Editorial Board is committed to ensuring that all published articles have a similarity index below 20%. Plagiarism checks are conducted using Turnitin.

Article Withdrawal, Corrections, and Retractions
Industrial Innovation has clear policies for handling article withdrawal, retraction, removal, and replacement. These standards are outlined in the journal’s policy guidelines.