Publication Ethics

Jurnal Riset Mahasiswa Akuntansi (RISMA) is a blind-reviewed journal published periodically four times a year (March, June, September, and December). Jurnal RISMA serves as a platform for publishing research in the field of accounting, covering areas such as Financial Accounting, Management Accounting, Auditing, Public Sector Accounting, Accounting Information Systems, Sharia Accounting, Taxation, Sustainability Accounting, Investments & Capital Markets, and other related fields.

The publication of articles in a blind-reviewed journal is a vital component in the advancement of knowledge. Such publications serve as a direct reflection of the quality of the work produced by the authors and their affiliated institutions. Articles that have undergone a blind-review process support and uphold a scientific approach. Consequently, it is essential to establish ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication process: journal editors, reviewers, and authors.

These guidelines have been adopted based on the publication ethics policies of Elsevier.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR EDITORS

1. Publication Decisions

The editors of Jurnal Riset Mahasiswa Akuntansi (RISMA) are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. This decision is based on the validity of the work and its contribution to researchers and readers. In carrying out their duties, editors are guided by the policies of the editorial board and are subject to legal requirements regarding issues such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or reviewers when making these decisions.

2. Objective Assessment

Editors evaluate manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the author’s religion, ethnicity, race, gender, nationality, or any other personal characteristic.

3. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, and the editorial board.

4. Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials submitted to Jurnal RISMA must not be used for an editor’s own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Information or ideas obtained through the blind review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors must recuse themselves from handling a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest—such as a competitive, collaborative, or other type of relationship—with the author(s), or with any company or institution connected to the manuscript.

5. Cooperation in Investigations

Editors must take responsive action when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted or published manuscript. This may involve contacting the author(s) to address the concerns and, if necessary, communicating with the relevant institution or research organization. Once a matter has been resolved, the editors should consider appropriate follow-up actions, such as publishing a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant notes.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR REVIEWERS

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Blind peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and helps authors improve their manuscripts through editorial communication between the reviewer and the author. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and the scientific approach.

2. Promptness

If an assigned reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows that they cannot complete the review within the required timeframe, they must notify the editor immediately.

3. Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others, except as authorized by the editor.

4. Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and provide supporting arguments.

5. Completeness and Originality of References

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the author has not cited. Any statement regarding an observation or argument that has been previously published should be accompanied by an appropriate citation. Reviewers should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published works, based on their own knowledge.

6. Conflict of Interest

Unpublished material from a manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the author’s written consent. Information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest—such as a competitive, collaborative, or other type of relationship—with the author, the company, or the institution associated with the work.

ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR AUTHORS

1. Writing Standards

Authors must present an accurate account of the research conducted, along with an objective discussion of its significance. Research data must be accurately represented in the article. An article should contain sufficient detail and adequate references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

2. Access to Research Data

Authors may be asked to provide raw data related to a manuscript under review; they should, whenever possible, facilitate public access to such data and retain it for a reasonable period following publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable in scholarly publishing. Authors must ensure that all work presented is original; if the work or words of others have been used, they must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism encompasses various forms, such as presenting another person’s writing as one’s own, copying or paraphrasing substantial portions of another’s work without proper attribution, or claiming credit for research conducted by others. Self-plagiarism—the act of reusing one’s own previously published work or specific phrases without citing the original source—is also considered a form of plagiarism. The editorial team will screen all articles using the Turnitin software. If an indication of plagiarism exceeding 20% ​​is detected, the editorial team will provide the author with an opportunity to revise the manuscript.

4. Submission Guidelines

Authors must not publish the same manuscript in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered unethical and is unacceptable in scholarly publishing.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the development of their own work. Information obtained privately—such as through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties—must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source of that information.

6. Authorship

An author is defined as an individual who has made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work presented in an article. All individuals who have made such significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors are included in the manuscript, that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the work, and that they have consented to the submission of the manuscript for publication.

7. Hazards and Human Subjects

If a manuscript involves procedures or equipment that carry inherent, unusual risks, the authors must clearly identify these within the text. If the research involves human subjects, the authors must ensure that the manuscript includes a statement confirming that all procedures were conducted in compliance with relevant laws, institutional regulations, and the approval of an institutional review committee. Authors must state within the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experiments involving human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must be strictly respected. Consent, permissions, and formal statements must be secured if the authors intend to include case details or other personal information regarding individuals. Written consent must be retained by the authors, and copies—or evidence that such consent has been obtained—must be provided to the journal upon request.

7. Errors in Published Work

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s responsibility to promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the work. If the editor is informed by a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author is responsible for promptly retracting or correcting the work, or providing evidence to the editor regarding the accuracy of the original publication.