PUBLICATION ETHICS

PUBLICATION ETHICS in ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling

ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling is a Peer Review Journal published by PT Giat Konseling Nusantara (GKN).  ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling publishes research manuscripts focusing on the fields of Theology, Pastoral Counseling, Christian Religious Education, and Christian Counseling Studies that have not been published elsewhere and are not currently under review.

Furthermore, this scientific code of ethics statement is a statement of the code of ethics for all parties involved in the publication process of this scientific journal, namely the managers, editors, reviewers, and authors. Therefore, the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publication in ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling refers to three ethical values in publication, namely a) Neutrality, which is free from conflicts of interest in publication management; b) Fairness, which means that we give authorship rights to those who are entitled to them; and c) Honesty, which means that publications must be free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism.

Code of Ethics for Journal Managers

The publisher of ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling is responsible for publishing manuscripts that have undergone editing, review, and layout processes in accordance with the publication guidelines of scientific journals.
The publisher of ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling is responsible for ensuring academic freedom for editors and peer reviewers in carrying out their respective duties.
The publisher of ATOHEMA: Jurnal Teologi Pastoral Konseling is responsible for maintaining and protecting privacy and intellectual property, as well as copyright and editorial freedom.

Author Code of Ethics

1. Reporting Standards

Authors must present accurate reports with original research results and objective discussions of their significance. Researchers must present their research results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data. Submitted manuscripts must contain  detailed and responsible references.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original scientific works. Manuscripts must not be submitted to more than one publication simultaneously. Previous works and publications by the researcher or author that are relevant must be stated in the references in accordance with the writing guidelines.

3. Dual or Simultaneous Publication

Authors are not permitted to create and submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously.

4. Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must acknowledge and cite all data sources used that have influenced their scientific work.

5. Authorship of Manuscripts

Authorship of a manuscript must reflect the individual's contribution to the work. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.

6. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If authors discover errors in their submitted manuscripts, they must immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the manuscript.

Editorial Code of Ethics

1. Publication Decisions

Based on the review reports from the editorial board, the editor may accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validity of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the editorial board and constrained by legal requirements as currently applicable to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may confer with the editor or reviewers in making these decisions. Editors must be responsible for all that they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and to safeguard the integrity of the published record.

2. Manuscript Review

Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by an editor for originality. Editors must organize and use peer reviews fairly and wisely. Editors must explain their peer review process in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors must use appropriate peer reviewers for papers being considered for publication by selecting individuals with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

3. Fair

Editors must ensure that each manuscript received is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the enforcement of the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position when making decisions about publication, which makes it very important that in carrying out this process, they act as fairly as possible.

4. Confidentiality

Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors must critically assess any potential violations of data protection and author confidentiality.

5. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Editors will not use unpublished material for their own research without the author's written consent. Editors must not be involved in decisions about manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

 Reviewers' Code of Ethics

1. Confidentiality

Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. They should not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

2. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant works that have not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should immediately notify the journal if they find any irregularities that raise concerns about the ethics of a manuscript, notice substantial similarities between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published manuscript, or suspect that errors may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and not investigate further personally unless the journal requests further information or advice.

3. Objectivity Standards

The review of submitted manuscripts must be conducted objectively, and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers must follow the journal's instructions regarding the feedback required from them, unless there are good reasons not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should explain how additional investigation is important to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration and that would only strengthen or expand the manuscript.

4. Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions. In cases of double-blind review, if they become aware of the authors' identities, they should inform the journal if this creates a potential conflict of interest.

5. Timeliness

Reviewers should respond within a reasonable time frame. Reviewers should only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident that they can return their review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe, informing the journal immediately if they require an extension. If reviewers feel it is impossible to complete the review of a manuscript within the specified time, they should immediately communicate this to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to other reviewers.