ETHICAL CONDITIONS TO THE EDITORS
1. Decisions regulating publishing
The editors of Cendekia Niaga are responsible for deciding which articles all contributing authors are to publish. The validity of the study, study contributions/significance that the article provides for the researchers and readers contributed to the final judgment. In so doing, the editors followed the editorial board's policy regarding laws such as defamation, infringement of copyright, and plagiarism. The editors will discuss the decision with other editors or reviewers.
2. Impartiality assessment / Fair Play
Editors carry out a manuscript analysis focused on academic content that disregards any religion, nationality, gender, class, age, and others.
Editors and members of the Editorial Board shall not reveal to anybody other than the relevant authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, and editorial board any information concerning a paper submitted.
4. Value disputes
A paper sent to Cendekia Niaga has not been published in other journals, so it must not be used for the personal research benefit of the Publisher without the author's written permission. Knowledge or ideas gained through a blind examination shall be held confidential and shall not be used for personal benefit. Editors may refuse to review the manuscript if they have a conflict of interest due to the business relationship, collaborative or other associations with the manuscript-related writers, businesses, or organization.
5. Cooperation in study / Prevention of illegal publishing behavior
Editors will take corrective measures if there are ethics-related concerns regarding a submitted manuscript or the papers written. Editors can contact the author and offer some thought regarding the complaint. Editors can further interact with the research-related institutions or organizations. If the case has been settled, it should be known that things such as corrected/republished, removal, expression of concern, or other documents should be completed.
1. Contributions to the judgment of the Publisher
Blind peer review helps the editors make decisions, and also helps the authors improve their writing through editorial communication between reviewers and authors. Peer review is an important aspect that is known as a methodological method in formal scientific communication (official scholarly communication).
A reviewer who considers her / himself unqualified to review the research output proposed, or finds out that the manuscripts can not be checked in a timely manner, must promptly notify the Publisher.
Every manuscript received for review shall be treated as confidential. The document will not be published or shared with any other entity unless the Publisher authorizes it
4. Objective Quality
Reviews have to be carried out according to the principle of objectivity. It is not acceptable to make personal comments about the author. Reviewers should clearly express their views on the basis of arguments that support them.
5. Completeness, and originality of reference
Reviewers will classify related published work that the writers have not cited/included. A statement or point that was published earlier should be followed by related quotes. Reviewers will always inform the editor whether there is any significant resemblance or connection between a manuscript submitted and any other published work that they know personally.
6. Controversy and conflicts of interest
The reviewer can not use articles that contain unpublished materials for his / her personal gain without the author's written permission. Data or ideas obtained through peer review shall be held confidential and shall not be used for his/her benefit. Reviewers may refuse to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest due to the contractual relationship, collaborative partnerships, or other ties they may have with any of the manuscript-related writers, businesses, or organizations.
ETHICAL STANDARDS AFTER
1. The Basic Reporting
The authors must present an exact work and an objective / fair debate on the purpose of the study. Precisely the data must be displayed in the article. An article with adequate references should be sufficiently supported so that others can replicate the work. It is unacceptable to present the paper fraudulently or inaccurately, which constitutes unethical behavior.
2. Access to data and the retention of research
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data for editorial review related to an article. Authors should be able to make these data accessible to the public, if necessary. Once the manuscript is written they will be able to store the data in a reasonable time.
3. Originality and Apology
Plagiarism in all types involves unethical conduct, which is intolerable in scientific works. Authors must ensure that all the work presented is original, and if the authors have used other people's work and/or words, they must submit the relevant citations. There are different ways of plagiarism, such as accepting others' writings in writing for yourself, copying or rewriting large parts of others' works without referencing sources, as well as claiming other people's study results. Plagiarism by itself or plagiarism by bibs is also a form of plagiarism. Plagiarism in Oto uses sentences from the author's own works that have been written without referencing sources.
4. Terms of Mail delivery
Writers are not needed to publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Sending the same document to more than one journal is, and is unacceptable and unethical behavior when publishing scientific papers.
5. Source credentials
It is essential to understand other people's job correctly. Authors must submit publications that have had a significant impact on the manuscript's scientific area. Information collected privately, such as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, could not be used or published without the authorization of the source in writing.
6. Authorship of the paper
An author is a person who contributes research meaning to the writing in the article in terms of concept/theory, design, implementation, or interpretation. All parties which made significant contributions are classified as co-authors. Correspondence writers should ensure that all co-authors have been included in the document and that all co-authors have read and accepted the final version of the work and approved the document 's submission for publication.
7. Faults in plays previously written
When authors consider a significant error or imprecision in a published article, it is their duty to inform the journal editor promptly and to collaborate with the editor to delete or correct the text. Where the editor receives information from third parties regarding a document that includes substantial errors in a paper, the writers are responsible for immediately removing or correcting the text editor or presenting evidence of the accuracy of the original writings