Mimbar Sekolah Dasar upholds the highest standards of publication ethics, guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and aligned with internationally recognized scholarly publishing norms. These principles are designed to safeguard academic integrity, ensure transparency in editorial processes, and foster trust between authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. All parties engaged in the publication process are expected to adhere strictly to these ethical guidelines, which aim to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, promote responsible research practices, and ensure the fair treatment of all contributors without discrimination or bias.
1. General Ethical Principles
The journal is committed to publishing only original, high-quality research that provides a meaningful contribution to the advancement of primary education. All editorial and peer review processes are conducted transparently, with decisions determined entirely by the academic quality of the work. The integrity of the academic record is protected by actively preventing and addressing all forms of publication malpractice, including plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and redundant publication. The journal also ensures that all authors, reviewers, and editorial members receive equitable and respectful treatment, free from bias related to nationality, ethnicity, sex, faith, or institutional affiliation. These principles form the foundation of MSD’s mission to advance scholarly knowledge responsibly.
2. Responsibilities of Authors
2.1 Originality and Plagiarism
Authors are responsible for guaranteeing that all manuscripts they submit are wholly their own work and do not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. Submissions that duplicate or significantly overlap with previously published work, whether by the same authors or others, are considered unethical and unacceptable. All manuscripts undergo plagiarism screening using Turnitin, with a maximum similarity index of 15% and no more than 3% from any single source. Authors are expected to avoid self-plagiarism, improper paraphrasing, and unacknowledged reuse of their own or others’ work.
2.2 Authorship Criteria
Authorship is reserved for contributors who have provided substantial academic input in the conception, methodology, implementation, or analysis of the work. Each author named is required to review and agree to the manuscript’s final form before it is submitted. Practices such as gift authorship (listing those who did not contribute) or ghostwriting (unacknowledged contributions) are strictly prohibited. The corresponding author bears responsibility to confirm that every co-author satisfies the authorship criteria and for managing all communication with the journal.
2.3 Data Integrity and Availability
Authors must present research findings truthfully, ensuring that data are accurate, complete, and free from fabrication or falsification. Data underlying the results should be retained for a reasonable period after publication and must be made available to editors, reviewers, or readers upon legitimate request, in line with institutional and funder requirements. Manipulation or selective reporting of data to mislead readers is considered a serious ethical violation.
2.4 Acknowledgment of Sources
Authors must properly acknowledge all works that have influenced their research. Direct quotations, paraphrased ideas, and data from other sources must be cited in accordance with the APA 7th edition referencing style. Failure to provide proper acknowledgment, even without direct quotation, may constitute plagiarism. Authors are also encouraged to cite relevant literature to contextualize their work within the broader scholarly discourse.
2.5 Ethical Compliance
For studies involving human participants, authors must ensure that their research has been approved by a recognized ethics committee and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki or equivalent guidelines. For research involving animals, appropriate ethical standards for care and use must be followed. Authors should include an explicit ethics statement in the manuscript detailing approval numbers and relevant protocols.
2.6 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Authors are required to reveal any financial, institutional, or personal affiliations that could be perceived as influencing the research. This includes funding sources, consultancies, stock ownership, or other forms of remuneration. A Funding Statement must be included in the manuscript, detailing every source that has provided support for the work. Transparency in disclosures is essential to maintain trust between the authors, editorial team, peer reviewers, and readers.
3. Responsibilities of Editors
3.1 Fair and Objective Evaluation
Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on the basis of their intellectual and scholarly value, without influence from personal relationships, institutional affiliations, nationality, gender, or political beliefs of the authors. Decisions should be guided by the journal’s scope, the relevance of the work to the field, and its originality and contribution to existing literature.
3.2 Confidentiality
Editors are required to handle all submitted manuscripts as confidential materials. Information from a manuscript should not be shared beyond those directly involved in the review process—such as reviewers and editorial staff—without the author’s consent. Editors must also ensure that confidential information is not used for personal advantage.
3.3 Managing the Peer Review Process
The journal implements a thorough double-blind peer review system to maintain objectivity. Editors are responsible for selecting reviewers with the appropriate expertise, managing timelines, and ensuring that reviews are constructive and free from bias. In cases where reviewer recommendations conflict, editors should seek additional input to reach a fair decision.
3.4 Addressing Misconduct
If ethical breaches are suspected—such as plagiarism, data manipulation, or duplicate submission—editors must act promptly, following COPE guidelines. This may include seeking explanations from authors, consulting with reviewers, or initiating formal investigations. All actions should be documented, and decisions should be communicated clearly to the parties involved.
3.5 Avoiding Conflicts of Interest
Editors must withdraw from managing manuscripts in which they possess personal, financial, or professional conflicts of interest. In such cases, another qualified editor will be assigned to oversee the review and decision-making process.
4. Responsibilities of Reviewers
4.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers assist editors by providing detailed, constructive feedback that informs editorial decisions and helps authors improve their work. Their comments should focus on the manuscript’s strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution to the field.
4.2 Objectivity and Professionalism
Reviews must be conducted impartially, without bias or personal criticism of the authors. Evaluations should be evidence-based, with reasoning supported by citations where relevant.
4.3 Confidentiality
All manuscripts in the review stage must remain confidential and cannot be disclosed or discussed beyond the review team without the editor’s approval. Reviewers must not use unpublished material from a manuscript in their own work without explicit permission from the author.
4.4 Identifying Relevant Sources
Reviewers should highlight any published work that is not cited by the authors but is relevant to the manuscript. They should also alert editors to any substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and other published works they are aware of.
4.5 Declining Reviews
Reviewers should accept review assignments only when they have the necessary expertise and can commit to meeting the deadline. They must decline invitations if they recognize a conflict of interest or lack the capacity to provide an objective evaluation.
5. Responsibilities of the Publisher
5.1 Editorial Independence
The publisher guarantees that editorial decisions are made without influence from commercial, political, or institutional interests. Editorial freedom is protected to ensure that decisions are based solely on academic merit and ethical standards.
5.2 Upholding Ethical Standards
The publisher maintains close cooperation with the editorial board to implement ethical guidelines, examine claims of misconduct, and release corrections, clarifications, or retractions as needed. These actions are guided by COPE recommendations and industry best practices.
5.3 Transparency
The publisher ensures that all journal policies—covering open access terms, article processing charges, copyright, and ethical guidelines—are clearly accessible on the journal’s website. This transparency builds trust among authors, reviewers, and readers.
6. Handling Publication Malpractice
6.1 Types of Misconduct
Publication misconduct includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, failure to disclose conflicts of interest, and duplicate submission. Each type of violation undermines the credibility of scholarly communication and damages the trust between the journal and its stakeholders.
6.2 Investigation and Actions
Allegations of misconduct are handled according to COPE procedures, ensuring fairness, confidentiality, and thorough documentation. Depending on the severity of the violation, actions may range from requesting clarifications from authors to rejecting or retracting manuscripts, issuing public notices, informing authors’ institutions, or banning future submissions. All corrective measures are taken with the aim of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.