Publication Ethics
Publication Ethics
At Digdaya Journal, we uphold the highest standards of publication ethics to ensure the integrity, credibility, and fairness of the research we publish. Our commitment to ethical publishing practices is guided by the following principles:
- Originality and Integrity: Authors are expected to submit original research that has not been published elsewhere. Any form of plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification of data is strictly prohibited and will result in immediate rejection or retraction of the manuscript.
- Authorship and Contributorship: All individuals who have made significant contributions to the research should be listed as authors. Authorship should be based on substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. Proper acknowledgment should be given to individuals who have contributed in other ways, such as providing technical assistance or guidance.
- Conflict of Interest: Authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation. This includes financial relationships, personal affiliations, or other competing interests that could bias the research process or its outcomes. Editors and reviewers are also expected to declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to provide unbiased evaluations.
- Peer Review Process: All submissions undergo a rigorous peer review process conducted by experts in the field. Peer reviewers are selected based on their expertise, impartiality, and integrity. They provide constructive feedback and recommendations to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. The peer review process is confidential, and reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the review process and any information obtained from the manuscript.
- Transparency and Accountability: We are committed to transparency and accountability in all aspects of our editorial process. Editors make decisions based on the merit of the manuscript and ensure that all editorial decisions are fair, impartial, and free from any form of bias or undue influence. Authors are provided with clear and timely communication regarding the status of their submissions, and any editorial decisions are explained clearly and transparently.
- Corrections and Retractions: In cases of errors or inaccuracies in published articles, we will promptly issue corrections, clarifications, or retractions as appropriate. Corrections are made to rectify minor errors, while retractions are issued for serious ethical violations or research misconduct. We are committed to correcting the scientific record and maintaining the integrity of our publications.
By adhering to these publication ethics principles, we aim to promote trust, integrity, and credibility in academic publishing and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of education.
Generative AI policies
We fully adopt the policy on the use of generative AI technology as outlined in the Generative AI Policies for Journals published by Elsevier. This policy provides comprehensive guidance regarding the use of generative AI technology, covering the following aspects:
These policies have been triggered by the rise of generative AI* and AI-assisted technologies, which are expected to increasingly be used by content creators. These policies aim to provide greater transparency and guidance to authors, reviewers, editors, readers and contributors. Elsevier will monitor this development and will adjust or refine policies when appropriate.
For authors
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific writing
Please note this policy only refers to the writing process, and not to the use of AI tools to analyze and draw insights from data as part of the research process.
Where authors use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, these technologies should only be used to improve readability and language of the work. Applying the technology should be done with human oversight and control and authors should carefully review and edit the result, because AI can generate authoritative-sounding output that can be incorrect, incomplete or biased. The authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work.
Authors should disclose in their manuscript the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies and a statement will appear in the published work. Declaring the use of these technologies supports transparency and trust between authors, readers, reviewers, editors and contributors and facilitates compliance with the terms of use of the relevant tool or technology.
Authors should not list AI and AI-assisted technologies as an author or co-author, nor cite AI as an author. Authorship implies responsibilities and tasks that can only be attributed to and performed by humans. Each (co-) author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved and authorship requires the ability to approve the final version of the work and agree to its submission. Authors are also responsible for ensuring that the work is original, that the stated authors qualify for authorship, and the work does not infringe third party rights, and should familiarize themselves with our Ethics in Publishing policy window before they submit.
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in figures, images and artwork
We do not permit the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or alter images in submitted manuscripts. This may include enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or introducing a specific feature within an image or figure. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Image forensics tools or specialized software might be applied to submitted manuscripts to identify suspected image irregularities.
The only exception is if the use of AI or AI-assisted tools is part of the research design or research methods (such as in AI-assisted imaging approaches to generate or interpret the underlying research data, for example in the field of biomedical imaging). If this is done, such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section. This should include an explanation of how the AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the image creation or alteration process, and the name of the model or tool, version and extension numbers, and manufacturer. Authors should adhere to the AI software’s specific usage policies and ensure correct content attribution. Where applicable, authors could be asked to provide pre-AI-adjusted versions of images and/or the composite raw images used to create the final submitted versions, for editorial assessment.
The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in the production of artwork such as for graphical abstracts is not permitted. The use of generative AI in the production of cover art may in some cases be allowed, if the author obtains prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, can demonstrate that all necessary rights have been cleared for the use of the relevant material, and ensures that there is correct content attribution.
For reviewers
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process
When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.
Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Elsevier abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.
Elsevier’s AI author policy states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure, as per our instructions in Elsevier’s Guide for Authors window. Reviewers can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references.
Please note that Elsevier owns identity protected AI-assisted technologies which conform to the RELX Responsible AI Principles window, such as those used during the screening process to conduct completeness and plagiarism checks and identify suitable reviewers. These in-house or licensed technologies respect author confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluation of bias and are compliant with data privacy and data security requirements.
Elsevier embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process, and we continue to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect authors’, reviewers’ and editors’ confidentiality and data privacy rights.
For editors
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal editorial process
A submitted manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Editors should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the manuscript including any notification or decision letters as they may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, editors should not upload their letters into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.
Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Elsevier abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Managing the editorial evaluation of a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by editors to assist in the evaluation or decision-making process of a manuscript as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for this work is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The editor is responsible and accountable for the editorial process, the final decision and the communication thereof to the authors.
Elsevier’s AI author policy window states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure, as per our instructions in Elsevier’s Guide for Authors window. Editors can find such disclosure at the bottom of the paper in a separate section before the list of references. If an editor suspects that an author or a reviewer has violated our AI policies, they should inform the publisher.
Please note that Elsevier owns identity protected AI-assisted technologies which conform to the RELX Responsible AI Principles window, such as those used during the screening process to conduct completeness and plagiarism checks and identify suitable reviewers. These in-house or licensed technologies respect author confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluation of bias and are compliant with data privacy and data security requirements.
Elsevier embraces new AI-driven technologies that support reviewers and editors in the editorial process, and we continue to develop and adopt in-house or licensed technologies that respect authors’, reviewers’ and editors’ confidentiality and data privacy rights.
