Efisiensi: Kajian Ilmu Administrasi is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal published by Jurusan Pendidikan Administrasi Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (the publisher name registered with ISSN; the unit is now the Department of Administration Education, Faculty of Economics and Business, UNY), in cooperation with ASPAPI (Asosiasi Sarjana dan Praktisi Administrasi Perkantoran Indonesia). The journal follows the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher must all follow the standards below.

This statement should be read together with the journal's detailed policies: Author Guidelines, Peer Review Process, Generative AI Policy, Plagiarism Policy, Authorship Policy, Conflict of Interest Policy, Research Misconduct, Correction and Retraction, and Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections.

1. Duties of Authors

1.1 Originality and plagiarism

• Authors must submit original work and cite or quote the work and words of others properly.
• Plagiarism in any form is not accepted, including verbatim copying, uncited paraphrasing, translation plagiarism, and substantial reuse of the authors' own published text.
• Every manuscript is checked with Turnitin. The similarity index must not exceed 20% overall and 1% from any single source, excluding the reference list. Details are in the Plagiarism Policy.

1.2 Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication

• A manuscript must not have been published before and must not be under consideration by another journal.
• Publications based on the same data or study must be disclosed and cross-referenced. Earlier conference presentations, preprints, theses, or reports must be stated at submission.

1.3 Authorship

• Authorship is limited to people who made a substantial contribution to the study, drafted or critically revised the manuscript, approved the final version, and accept accountability for the work.
• Each author's contribution is stated in an Author Contribution Statement using the CRediT roles.
• Gift, guest, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Any change to the author list after submission requires the written agreement of all authors and the editor's approval (Authorship Policy).

1.4 Data, accuracy, and reporting

• Authors must report their work accurately and discuss its significance objectively. Data must not be fabricated, falsified, or selectively omitted.
• Authors should follow reporting standards appropriate to the design, for example PRISMA 2020 for systematic reviews.
• Authors should keep their raw data, such as questionnaires, interview transcripts, and datasets, and provide them when the editor asks.

1.5 Research with human participants

• Research involving people, such as surveys of employees or students, interviews with officials, observations in offices or schools, or experiments, must follow accepted ethical principles.
• Informed consent must be obtained from participants, and from parents or guardians for minors.
• The article must state the number and year of the ethics approval, or a statement that the study complied with research ethics and that informed consent was obtained.
• The identities of participants and of organisations that asked not to be named must be protected.

1.6 Conflicts of interest and funding

• All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial interest that could be seen to influence the work in a Conflict of Interest Statement (Conflict of Interest Policy).
• All sources of funding, with grant numbers, must be declared in a Funding Statement, or the authors must state that the research received no external funding.

1.7 Use of generative AI

• AI tools cannot be authors. Any use of generative AI must be disclosed in a Declaration of Generative AI Use.
• AI must not be used to generate data, results, or references.
• Full details are given in the Generative AI Policy.

1.8 Errors in published work

Authors who find a significant error in their published article must notify the editor promptly and cooperate in correcting or retracting it (Correction and Retraction).

2. Duties of Editors

2.1 Publication decisions

• The Editor-in-Chief decides which manuscripts are published, based on originality, rigour, significance, fit with the journal's scope, and the reviewers' advice. Commercial considerations, including payment of the article processing charge, play no part in editorial decisions.
• Decisions are made within the timelines set out in the Peer Review Process.

2.2 Fairness and non-discrimination

Manuscripts are evaluated only on their scholarly merit. The authors' gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, political views, institution, or seniority are not taken into account.

2.3 Confidentiality

Editors share information about a manuscript only with the authors, reviewers, and editorial advisers as needed, and protect the anonymity of authors and reviewers. Unpublished material may not be used in an editor's own research without the authors' written consent, and may not be uploaded to generative AI tools.

2.4 Conflicts of interest

• Editors withdraw from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
• Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, or editorial board members are handled by another editor who has no conflict, and the editor-author has no access to the review records. This is documented in OJS.

2.5 Handling of ethical concerns

Editors act promptly on ethical concerns about submitted or published work, following the COPE flowcharts and the journal's Research Misconduct policy, and correct the scholarly record where necessary.

3. Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution: reviewers help editors decide and help authors improve their work.
• Promptness: reviewers who are not qualified, or who cannot finish within 21 days, decline promptly.
• Confidentiality: manuscripts are confidential. They must not be shared, discussed, or uploaded to generative AI tools. Reviewers must not use AI to analyse a manuscript or write a review.
• Objectivity: reviews are specific, evidence-based, and courteous. Reviewers do not ask authors to cite the reviewer's own work without a genuine scholarly reason.
• Sources and misconduct: reviewers point out relevant uncited work and tell the editor about substantial similarity or suspected misconduct.
• Conflicts of interest: reviewers decline manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest and do not try to identify the authors.

4. Duties of the Publisher

• The publisher, Jurusan Pendidikan Administrasi Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, and its partner ASPAPI support the editorial independence of the journal and do not interfere in editorial decisions.
• The publisher provides the resources for similarity checking, DOI registration with Crossref, long-term digital preservation, and the integrity of the published record.
• The publisher works with the editors on ethical concerns, corrections, and retractions, following COPE guidance.

5. Policies on Specific Issues

6. Reporting Ethical Concerns

Concerns about a manuscript or a published article can be sent to the Editor-in-Chief at efisiensi@uny.ac.id. Please give the article title or submission ID, a description of the concern, and any supporting evidence. Concerns are handled confidentially, and the person raising them is protected from retaliation.

Sources

• Committee on Publication Ethics. (2017). Core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
• COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, & WAME. (2022). Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing (Version 4). https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12
• COPE Council. (2017). Ethical guidelines for peer reviewers (Version 2). https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.9
• International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (2024). Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work. https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/