Publication Ethics

Community Service Journal Publication Ethics is based on the Committee on Publications Ethics ( COPE ) listed in COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journals Editors. We have personalized this COPE according to our journals, such as Authorship, Complaints, Conflicts of Interest Policy, Publication Ethics (Authors, Editors and Reviewers), Privacy Statement, Copyright, Publication Fees, About this Publishing System, Open Access Policy, Process Peer Review, and Disclaimer. For the details of these ethics, you can find an explanation below.

Publication Ethics - Author

1. Reporting Standards: Articles resulting from community service must be able to present accurate data based on the activities carried out and supported by sufficient details and references to enable others to cite the work.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original work, and if authors have used the work and words of others, these have been properly cited or quoted.
3. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author may not generally publish manuscripts describing the same community service article in various journals or primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour, which is unacceptable.
4. Acknowledgement of Source: Proper acknowledgement of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that are influential in determining the nature of the work reported.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest  All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that could be construed to influence the outcome or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
6. Fundamental errors in published work: When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, the author must immediately notify the editor of the journal or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Publication Ethics - Editor

1. Fair Game: Editors at all times evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.
2. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff shall not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the appropriate authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and publishers.
3. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in an editor's research without the author's written consent.
4. Editor Criteria: Editors, both local and international, must have papers or manuscripts published in Journals, especially on Community topics Engagement. An editor can help the reviewer to provide input on the manuscript in addition to the results of the review by the reviewer. 
5. Publication Decision  The editorial board is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published. The work's intended validation and importance to researchers and readers should always drive those decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by legal requirements that will apply regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Publication Ethics - Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer The reviewer assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communication with the author, can help the author improve the paper.
2. Reviewer Criteria: Both local and international reviewers must have papers or manuscripts published in journals, especially on Community Service or Community Engagement. And also, the reviewers have published articles with the same theme as the manuscripts to be reviewed. Or the reviewer has a community program engagement with the same music.
3. Standards of Objectivity: The review must be conducted objectively. The author's criticism is inappropriate. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as the editors permit.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any author, company, or institution associated with the paper.
6. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must identify relevant published work that the author has not cited. Any statement for which observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported must be accompanied by appropriate citations. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers they know personally.
7. Review Period: Reviewers must review the manuscript within 1 to 2 months (maximum). And the number of reviewers for each manuscript is two minimum) and 5fivermax).
8. Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated for authenticity. Editors must manage and use peers' fair and wise reviews. The editor must describe the peer process of their study in the information for authors and indicate which part of the journal was reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for articles considered for publication by selecting those with sufficient expertise and avoiding conflicts of interest.