Publication Ethics
RAPIDS: Riset Aplikasi Ilmu Data dan Sistem is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, scientific integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing. The journal adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and Elsevier Publishing Ethics.
These principles govern the responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process—including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—to ensure that every published article meets the highest standards of academic quality, originality, fairness, and ethical conduct.
1. Publication Ethics For Authors
1.1 Reporting Standards and Data Availability
Authors must present research findings accurately, objectively, and transparently. Manuscripts shall provide sufficient methodological detail to ensure reproducibility. Authors may be requested to provide the underlying data during the editorial or peer-review process for verification purposes.
1.2 Originality and Citation
Submitted manuscripts must be original and must not contain plagiarism in any form. Authors are responsible for appropriately acknowledging the work of others through proper citation and referencing. Confidential information obtained through personal communication or privileged access may only be used with explicit authorization.
1.3 Multiple or Redundant Publication
Manuscripts submitted to RAPIDS must not be under consideration, accepted, or published elsewhere. Duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submissions are considered unethical, except where permitted for preprints, theses, or other forms consistent with the journal's policy.
1.4 Authorship
Authorship shall be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the research. Contributions should be described using the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) where applicable. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors have approved the final manuscript prior to submission.
1.5 Research Ethics
Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards and institutional regulations. Where required, authors must provide evidence of ethical approval and informed consent. Studies using publicly available or secondary datasets should clearly state the source and accessibility of the data.
1.6 Competing Interests
Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence the interpretation of the research. If no competing interests exist, authors should explicitly declare this.
1.7 Corrections and Retractions
Authors are responsible for promptly notifying the editor if a significant error or inaccuracy is identified in a published article and must cooperate in issuing corrections, retractions, or other appropriate editorial actions.
1.8 Image Integrity
Images must accurately represent the original data. Adjustments intended solely to improve clarity are acceptable, provided they do not alter, misrepresent, or obscure the scientific content.
2. Publication Ethics For Reviewer
2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer reviewers play a vital role in supporting editorial decisions and improving manuscript quality. Reviews should be conducted objectively, constructively, and within the agreed review period. Reviewers who are unable to complete the review or lack the necessary expertise should promptly notify the editor.
2.2 Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers shall not disclose, distribute, or use unpublished material for personal or professional advantage without prior authorization from the editor.
2.3 Ethical Responsibility
Reviewers are expected to identify potential ethical concerns, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, or research misconduct, and report such issues confidentially to the editor.
2.4 Objectivity and Conflict of Interest
Reviews must be based solely on scientific merit and supported by objective arguments. Reviewers shall avoid personal criticism and disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. Citation recommendations should be made only when scientifically justified.
3. Publication Ethics For Editor
3.1 Editorial Responsibility
Editors are responsible for making publication decisions based on the manuscript's originality, scientific quality, significance, and relevance to the scope of RAPIDS, while complying with applicable ethical and legal standards.
3.2 Peer Review Process
Editors shall ensure a fair, objective, confidential, and timely peer-review process by assigning manuscripts to qualified and independent reviewers while avoiding conflicts of interest.
3.3 Fair Evaluation
Editorial decisions must be made without discrimination based on nationality, gender, ethnicity, institutional affiliation, religion, or political beliefs. Manuscripts shall be evaluated exclusively on academic merit.
3.4 Publication Integrity
Editors must not manipulate journal metrics or require unnecessary citations to increase citation-based indicators. Citation recommendations should be based solely on scholarly relevance.
3.5 Confidentiality
Editors shall maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and peer-review communications. Unpublished materials must not be used for personal research without the authors' explicit written permission.
3.6 Conflict of Interest
Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have personal, professional, financial, or institutional conflicts of interest. Such manuscripts shall be managed independently to ensure an impartial review process.
3.7 Maintaining the Scholarly Record
Editors, in collaboration with the publisher, are responsible for investigating allegations of research or publication misconduct. Similarity screening tools (e.g., Turnitin or equivalent software) may be used to support editorial evaluation. When misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions—including corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions—shall be issued promptly and transparently to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.