Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and taking all possible action against publication malpractices. This publication ethics and malpractice statement is compiled from various credible sources, such as Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher as well as the society.

Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Garut University, Indonesia as the publisher of Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari 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 Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Garut University, and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

The following statement describes the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing articles for the Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari, namely: editors, peer reviewers, and authors.

1. Duties of Editors

1.1 Publication Decision

The editor of the Jurnal Ilmiah Farmako Bahari is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be accepted for publication. 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. The journal used Turnitin to detect the possibilities of plagiarism in the manuscript.

1.2 Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

1.3 Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial board member must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

1.4. 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.

1.5. Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

The editor must take sufficiently responsive steps when ethical complaints regarding manuscripts submitted in relation to the publisher (or the public) are found.

These steps generally include contacting the authors of the manuscript and giving consideration to the respective complaints or claims that have been made, further communication to the relevant agencies and research bodies and if the complaint has been upheld then publication corrections, recalls, expressions of apologies. , or other notes that may be relevant.

Any reported act of unethical behavior in publication should be kept under scrutiny even if it is discovered several years after publication.

2. Duties of Reviewers

2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewer(s) assists the editorial team in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author. Besides, the reviewer(s) may also assist the author in improving the paper.

2.2 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.

2.3 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.

2.4 Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

2.5 Source Acknowledgment

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.

2.6 Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

3.1 Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical conduct and are unacceptable.

3.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

3.3 Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

3.4 Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.

3.5 Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be in writing. Authors must cite publications that have influenced the research being reported. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties must not be used or reported without written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential service such as jury manuscripts or grant applications may not be used without written permission from the authors involved.

3.6 Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

3.7 Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. The procedures related to humans or animals should be approved by the Ethics Committee and/or refer to the standard procedures.

3.8 Natural Medicine Materials

A study using natural medicine materials should provide the latin names, nomenclature author, family name (in parentheses), the source, extraction/fractionation methods for all collected materials used in the study. Pharmacological Evaluation of the materials should use a reference (positive control).

3.9. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or another substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

3.10 Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper