AUTHOR ETHICS

Reporting Standards

Authors must provide accurate, clear, honest, and comprehensive information regarding the implementation process, methods, outcomes, and impacts of community service activities. Authors are responsible for maintaining and preserving all supporting data related to the submitted manuscript.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript is an original work resulting from their own community service activities and ideas. Any form of plagiarism, including copying text, ideas, data, images, or results from other sources without proper acknowledgment, is strictly prohibited.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission

Authors must confirm that the manuscript submitted to JUMASTRI has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal or publication. Manuscripts found to have been submitted simultaneously to multiple publications will be rejected.

Authorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the planning, implementation, documentation, analysis, and writing of the community service activity. The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal and ensuring that all co-authors have approved the final manuscript.

Correction of Errors

Authors are obliged to immediately notify the editor if they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their manuscript after submission or publication. Appropriate corrections or retractions must be made promptly to maintain the integrity of the publication.

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or professional conflicts of interest that may influence the interpretation or presentation of the community service results reported in the manuscript.

EDITOR ETHICS

Publication Decisions

Editors are responsible for making publication decisions based on the manuscript's quality, originality, relevance to the scope of JUMASTRI, and reviewer recommendations. Editorial decisions must be objective, transparent, and fair.

Information Management

Editors must manage and maintain the confidentiality, integrity, and security of all submitted manuscripts and related information throughout the editorial process.

Peer Review Management

Editors are responsible for selecting qualified reviewers, ensuring a fair and timely review process, and facilitating communication between authors and reviewers while maintaining confidentiality.

Objectivity and Fairness

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit, relevance, and contribution to community service development without discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.

Confidentiality

Editors must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher as appropriate.

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest

Editors must avoid handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, institutional, financial, or personal relationships with the authors.

REVIEWER ETHICS

Objectivity and Independence

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally. Reviews should be based solely on the academic quality, relevance, and contribution of the manuscript to community service practices and knowledge dissemination.

Source Verification

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and report any suspected plagiarism, duplication, or unethical publication practices to the editor.

Timeliness of Review

Reviewers are expected to complete manuscript evaluations within the specified review period (maximum of two weeks). If unable to complete the review within the allocated time, reviewers should promptly notify the editorial office.

Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and must not share, discuss, or use unpublished information obtained through the review process for personal advantage.

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, institutional, financial, or personal relationships with the authors or related organizations.