Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics
This statement describes the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles in our journal, including authors, editors, peer-reviewers, and publishers. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Journal Publication Ethics Guidelines
The peer-reviewed publication of articles in the Briliant: Jurnal Riset dan Konseptual is an important foundation in developing a coherent and respected knowledge network. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is important to agree on standards of ethical behavior expected for all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers, and the public.
Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Blitar as publisher of this Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Universitas Nahdlatul Ulama Blitar and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Publication decisions
The editors of the Briliant: Jurnal Riset dan Konseptual are 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. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor at any time 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 any 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.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
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 himself 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.