Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

1. Ethical Principles and Scope

This statement outlines the ethical standards and responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process of Vocational: Journal of Educational Technology, including authors, reviewers, editors, the editorial board, and the publisher, Yayasan Pendidikan dan Pengembangan Harapan Ananda.

The journal adheres strictly to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, and credibility of the scholarly record.

Vocational: Journal of Educational Technology is a peer-reviewed international journal published by Yayasan Pendidikan dan Pengembangan Harapan Ananda in collaboration with the Indonesian Journal Publishers Association (HIPJI), Relawan Jurnal Indonesia (RJI), Association of Informatics and Computer Colleges (APTIKOM), and the Indonesian Informaticians Association (IAII).

The publication of peer-reviewed articles represents a fundamental contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge and reflects the academic quality of both the authors and their affiliated institutions. Therefore, high ethical standards are required of all parties involved in the publication process.

2. Editorial Independence and Responsibility

The publisher ensures full editorial independence. Editorial decisions are made solely on academic merit and relevance to the journal’s scope, without influence from advertising, commercial interests, or institutional affiliations.

The Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and Editorial Board are responsible for safeguarding ethical standards throughout the editorial workflow and for resolving ethical issues in accordance with COPE procedures.

3. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief, supported by the Editorial Board, is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are accepted for publication. Decisions are based on:

  • Scientific validity and methodological rigor

  • Originality and contribution to the field

  • Relevance to the journal’s scope

  • Ethical compliance

Editors may consult reviewers or other editors when necessary. Legal considerations related to defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and data protection are strictly observed.

4. Peer Review Process (Detailed Description)

Vocational: Journal of Educational Technology applies a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review.

Review Stages:

  1. Initial Screening

    • Conducted by the Editor-in-Chief

    • Scope alignment and basic quality check

    • Similarity screening using plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin)

  2. Editorial Assignment

    • Manuscripts passing initial screening are assigned to a Handling Editor with relevant expertise

  3. Double-Blind Peer Review

    • Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers

    • Reviewers are selected based on expertise and verified via ORCID, Scopus ID, Web of Science Researcher ID, Google Scholar, or institutional profiles

    • Review criteria include originality, methodological soundness, clarity, relevance, and ethical compliance

  4. Editorial Decision

    • Based on reviewers’ reports, the editor issues one of the following decisions:

      • Accept

      • Minor Revision

      • Major Revision

      • Reject

  5. Revision and Re-evaluation

    • Revised manuscripts may be re-reviewed if necessary

    • Final acceptance is issued only after all reviewer and editorial requirements are satisfactorily met

5. Average Manuscript Turnaround Time

To ensure transparency and efficiency, the journal provides the following average timelines:

  • Initial editorial screening: 7–10 days

  • Peer review process: 4–6 weeks

  • First decision: approximately 6–8 weeks after submission

  • Total turnaround time (submission to final decision): 8–12 weeks

These timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and the extent of required revisions.

6. Average Manuscript Acceptance Rate

The journal maintains a selective acceptance policy to ensure high academic quality.

  • Average acceptance rate: 25–35%

This rate reflects the journal’s commitment to publishing only manuscripts that meet rigorous scientific and ethical standards.

7. Author Responsibilities and Authorship

All listed authors must have made a substantial contribution to the manuscript and share responsibility for its content. Authorship must accurately reflect individual contributions and follow the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy).

Authors must ensure that:

  • Manuscripts are original and unpublished

  • All data are accurate and verifiable

  • Conflicts of interest are disclosed

  • Ethical approval and informed consent are obtained where applicable.

8. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Generative AI tools may be used only to improve language clarity and readability, under full human supervision. AI tools:

  • Cannot be listed as authors

  • Must be disclosed transparently in a dedicated section titled
    “Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Writing Process”

Authors retain full responsibility for the manuscript content.

9. Plagiarism and Data Integrity

Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, and data falsification are strictly prohibited. The journal follows COPE guidelines when handling allegations of misconduct.

Authors must retain raw data and provide it upon editorial request.

10. Research Involving Human Subjects

Research involving human participants must:

  • Receive approval from an authorized ethics committee

  • Comply with the Declaration of Helsinki (2013)

  • Protect participant privacy and confidentiality

  • Include documented informed consent.

11. Reviewer Ethics and Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Conduct objective, confidential, and timely reviews

  • Declare conflicts of interest and decline reviews when necessary

  • Report suspected ethical misconduct to the editor

  • Avoid misuse of unpublished material for personal benefit.

12. Editor Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for:

  • Fair, unbiased, and transparent editorial decisions

  • Managing conflicts of interest

  • Ensuring ethical compliance

  • Handling appeals, complaints, corrections, and retractions in line with COPE procedures.

13. Ethical Concerns, Corrections, and Retractions

The Editor-in-Chief is the primary contact for ethical concerns, appeals, and complaints. Proven misconduct may result in:

  • Correction

  • Retraction

  • Notification to relevant institutions or indexing services

The journal does not charge fees for corrections or retractions.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE Position Statements.
Elsevier. The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Writing.

COPE: Committee on Publication Ethics. COPE position statement. Retrieved from https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author?ct=t(member-insight-ai-feb-2023)

Elsevier. The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing for Elsevier. Retrieved from https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies-and-standards/the-use-of-generative-ai-and-ai-assisted-technologies-in-writing-for-elsevier