Publication Ethics

Luxfia: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in handling all aspects of publication ethics, especially in managing cases of research and publication misconduct. This statement explains the expected ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication process of this journal, including authors, editors-in-chief, editors, reviewers, and the publisher: PT RisTekUtama (Riset Cendikia Teknologi Utama).

This journal is committed to following best practices in addressing ethical issues, corrections, and retractions of manuscripts. Preventing publication malpractice is an essential responsibility of the editorial board. Any form of unethical behavior is unacceptable, and this journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

This statement describes the ethical behavior expected from all parties involved in the publication process of Luxfia: Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher PT RisTekUtama (Riset Cendikia Teknologi Utama).

Journal Publication Ethics Guidelines

The publication of articles in peer-reviewed journals is an essential element in the development of a coherent and respected body of knowledge. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to establish standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

As the publisher of Luxfia, PT RisTekUtama (Riset Cendikia Teknologi Utama) takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. Advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenues have no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The publisher and the editorial board will also assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication Decisions

The editor-in-chief of Luxfia is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Non-Discrimination

Editors and reviewers will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

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.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Luxfia uses a double-blind review system. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality

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.

Standards of Objectivity

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

Acknowledgement of Sources

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.

Conflict of Interest

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.

Author Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

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.

Data Access and Retention

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 (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

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.

Acknowledgement of Sources

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.

Authorship of the Paper

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. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate 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.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their 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.