Eduistiqomah in Philosophy (EIP) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity in all stages of scholarly publishing. The journal expects authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to uphold principles of honesty, transparency, accountability, fairness, confidentiality, intellectual independence, and respect for intellectual property.
This Publication Ethics Statement establishes the ethical responsibilities and standards applicable to all parties involved in the publication process. EIP does not tolerate plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, manipulation of citations, conflicts of interest that are not disclosed, or any other form of academic or publication misconduct.
EIP is committed to:
All individuals involved in the publication process share responsibility for maintaining these standards.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions comply with the ethical and scholarly standards of EIP.
Authors must:
Authors must not engage in:
Authors remain responsible for the intellectual content and integrity of their manuscripts.
EIP considers plagiarism and other forms of unattributed appropriation of intellectual work to be serious violations of publication ethics.
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
Submitted manuscripts may be screened using appropriate similarity-detection procedures.
The Editorial Board may reject a manuscript or take appropriate post-publication action if plagiarism or significant inappropriate similarity is identified.
A similarity score alone does not automatically establish plagiarism. Editorial assessment considers the nature, location, context, and source of the similarity.
EIP does not tolerate fabrication or falsification of scholarly information.
Fabrication refers to inventing data, sources, quotations, references, research activities, or other information that did not exist.
Falsification refers to manipulating, altering, omitting, or misrepresenting information in a manner that could distort the scholarly record.
For philosophical research, particular attention is given to the accurate representation of:
Any suspected fabrication or falsification will be investigated by the Editorial Board.
Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contribution to the work.
Individuals listed as authors should have contributed meaningfully to the conception, development, analysis, interpretation, drafting, or substantive revision of the manuscript and should approve the final version.
The following practices are considered inappropriate:
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors have approved the manuscript and agreed to its submission.
Any change to authorship after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors and the Editorial Office.
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.
EIP considers duplicate publication to include substantial republication of previously published material without appropriate disclosure or justification.
If authors intend to reuse material from their previous work, they must provide appropriate citation and clearly disclose the relationship between the publications.
Where duplicate publication is discovered after publication, the Editorial Board may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction depending on the circumstances.
Authors must cite sources accurately and responsibly.
Citations should:
Authors and reviewers must not request citations solely to increase citation counts or artificially influence the journal's citation metrics.
Citation manipulation is considered a form of publication misconduct.
Editors are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated fairly, independently, and according to scholarly and ethical standards.
Editors must:
Editors should not participate in editorial decisions concerning manuscripts in which they have a personal, professional, institutional, or financial conflict of interest.
Reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scholarly quality and integrity of EIP.
Reviewers must:
Reviewers must not:
EIP uses a double-blind peer-review process.
The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process.
All participants are expected to respect the confidentiality of the process. Reviewers should not attempt to identify authors, and authors should not attempt to identify reviewers.
Where an accidental disclosure or potential breach of confidentiality occurs, the Editorial Office will assess the situation and take appropriate measures to protect the integrity of the review process.
A conflict of interest may arise when personal, professional, institutional, financial, or other relationships could reasonably influence scholarly judgment.
Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose relevant conflicts of interest.
Potential conflicts may include:
If a conflict is significant enough to affect impartiality, the individual should withdraw from the relevant editorial or review activity.
Authors conducting research involving human participants, interviews, personal information, sensitive data, or other ethically regulated activities must comply with applicable ethical requirements.
Where relevant, manuscripts should provide information concerning:
For philosophical and conceptual research, authors should ensure responsible and accurate treatment of primary sources, historical materials, intellectual traditions, and interpretations of other scholars.
EIP recognizes that artificial intelligence and generative AI technologies may be used in scholarly workflows. However, authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and intellectual content of their manuscripts.
AI tools must not be listed as authors.
Authors may use AI-assisted tools for limited purposes such as language improvement, proofreading, translation assistance, or other non-substantive editorial tasks, provided that the final intellectual responsibility remains with the authors.
Authors must verify all AI-assisted content, including:
Authors should disclose substantive use of generative AI in accordance with the journal's applicable AI policy.
Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished manuscript content to external AI systems when doing so could compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or the integrity of the review process.
Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the sources used in their manuscripts.
For philosophical research, authors should provide sufficient bibliographic information to enable readers to locate and verify cited primary and secondary sources.
Where applicable, authors should provide access to research materials, textual sources, analytical procedures, or supporting information necessary to evaluate the scholarly argument, subject to ethical, legal, and copyright restrictions.
EIP provides authors with an opportunity to raise legitimate concerns regarding editorial procedures or decisions.
Complaints and appeals should be submitted to the Editorial Office with a clear explanation of the issue and supporting information where applicable.
The Editorial Board will review complaints objectively and confidentially.
An appeal should focus on substantive concerns such as:
Disagreement with an editorial decision alone does not necessarily constitute grounds for an appeal.
The Editor-in-Chief may seek an independent assessment where appropriate.
When an allegation of publication misconduct is received, the Editorial Board will assess the concern carefully and fairly.
Potential misconduct may include:
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the Editorial Board may:
The journal seeks to handle allegations fairly, confidentially, and proportionately.
EIP is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the published scholarly record.
A correction may be issued when a published article contains an error that does not invalidate the overall scholarly contribution but requires amendment.
A published article may be retracted when there is substantial evidence that the article contains serious problems affecting its reliability or integrity, including significant fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical publication practices, or major errors that invalidate the scholarly contribution.
Retractions will be clearly identified and linked to the original publication where possible.
The original scholarly record will not be altered unnecessarily. Retraction notices should explain the reason for the action.
In circumstances where serious concerns exist but an investigation has not yet reached a definitive conclusion, the Editorial Board may publish an Expression of Concern.
An Expression of Concern alerts readers to potential problems while an appropriate investigation is undertaken.
The notice may subsequently be followed by a correction, retraction, or other editorial action depending on the outcome.
The publisher supports the Editorial Board in maintaining the integrity and independence of the journal.
The publisher is expected to:
Editorial decisions at EIP are based on scholarly considerations, including originality, academic quality, relevance, methodological or analytical rigor, philosophical significance, and compliance with publication ethics.
Editorial decisions must not be improperly influenced by commercial interests, institutional pressure, personal relationships, political considerations, or other external factors.
The Editorial Board retains responsibility for editorial decisions and the academic direction of the journal.
Eduistiqomah in Philosophy (EIP) is committed to fostering a scholarly environment characterized by intellectual integrity, philosophical rigor, academic independence, transparency, fairness, and respect for diverse intellectual traditions.
All authors, reviewers, editors, and publishing partners are expected to contribute to the protection of the scholarly record and to uphold responsible standards of academic communication.
By submitting or reviewing manuscripts for EIP, participants acknowledge their responsibility to comply with the journal's publication ethics, peer-review procedures, academic integrity requirements, and applicable editorial policies.
The journal may periodically revise this Publication Ethics Statement to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research ethics, digital scholarship, and responsible use of emerging technologies.
SUBMIT ARTICLE
ARTICLE TEMPLATE ENGLISH
ARTICLE TEMPLATE INDONESIA
Tools
 |
 |
CITEDNESS IN SCOPUS
Contact us
INFORMATION
