PUBLICATION ETHICS

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Jurna Airaha (p-ISSN 2130-7163; e-ISSN 2621-9638) is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Sorong Marine and Fisheries Polytechnic. This statement describes the ethical conduct of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles in this journal, including the author, the Editor-in-chief, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewers and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE's best practice guidelines for Journal editors.

Ethical guidelines for Journal Publications

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed Airaha Journal is an important building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the author's work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree on the standards of ethical conduct expected for all parties involved in the publishing act: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the public. The Sorong Marine and Fisheries Polytechnic as the publisher of the Airaha Journal takes on the duty of trusteeship over all stages of publication and we are aware of our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints or other commercial revenue do not impact or influence editorial decisions. In addition, the Fisheries Research and Development Centre and the Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication Decision

The editor of the Airaha Journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive the decision. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and are limited by such legal provisions regarding defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors can consult with the editorial board or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair Play

Editors at all times evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.

Concealment

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewer, potential reviewer, other appropriate editorial advisor, and publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Reviewer Duties

Contributions to Editorial Decisions

Peer review helps editors in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with authors can also help writers in improving the manuscript.

Speed

Any elected editorial board that feels qualified to review research reported in the manuscript or knows that a speedy review would be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Concealment

Any manuscript accepted for review should be treated as a confidential document. They should not be displayed or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

Objectivity Standards

The review should be done objectively. Personal criticism from the author is inappropriate. The Editorial Board should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Source

Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the author. A statement that observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and any