Ethics Statement

INTRODUCTION


Asia-Pacific Journal of Information Technology and Multimedia, henceforth referred to as "The Journal", aims to select and publish, through double-blind peer-review, the highest quality research articles in Information Technology from the Asia-Pacific region. The Journal is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in publishing and follows internationally recognized principles for integrity in research and scholarly communication.


The editorial board will make the utmost effort to ensure that the peer-review and publication process is thorough, objective, and fair. This guideline on The Journal publication code of ethics is largely based upon the principles upheld by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). COPE outlines standards for good behaviour and solutions to ethical issues faced by Authors, Editors, and Reviewers. The full guidelines can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org


The Journal publication code of ethics has been designed to safeguard the integrity of the journal and to ascertain all published materials are of the highest scientific and ethical standard. We expect all stakeholders: authors, reviewers, and editors to adhere to these ethical principles to ensure the credibility, integrity, and transparency of published research. Any ethical issue or question concerning The Journal can be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief. This code of ethics applies to manuscripts submitted to The Journal and is revised periodically by the Editorial Board.


CODE OF ETHICS FOR EDITORIAL BOARD


Editorial Responsibilities

The editorial team follows COPE's Core Practices to ensure fair, unbiased, and confidential handling of submissions. Editors evaluate manuscripts based on their academic merit without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Editorial decisions should be based solely on the paper's importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope.


Handling of Submitted Manuscripts

The Editor-in-Chief should evaluate manuscripts fairly and solely on their intellectual merit. An acknowledgment with a reference number must be sent to the Authors once the manuscript is received. Manuscripts deemed to be in good order must be sent to reviewers without delay. Confidentiality of manuscripts must be ensured, and information regarding manuscripts should not be disclosed to anyone other than the people involved in the publishing process.


Decision Quality

The Editor-in-Chief must provide the Authors with a clear explanation of the editorial decision on a manuscript. Editor-in-Chief should write high-quality editorial letters that integrate reviewers' comments and offer additional suggestions to the Author. The responsibility for deciding which articles are published lies within the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board.


Handling Conflicts of Interest

TWhen editors are presented with manuscripts where their own interests may influence their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should hand over the handling of the manuscript to another qualified editor in the board. The Editorial Board will appoint a suitable member to handle such manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally, free of personal biases that may affect judgment.


Submissions from Editorial Board members undergo the same rigorous double-blind review process as all other submissions. When making editorial decisions about peer-reviewed articles where an editor is an Author or is acknowledged as a contributor, The Journal ensures that the affected editors exclude themselves from the publication process. Although editors are allowed to submit manuscripts to The Journal, excessive submissions from the Journal's own Editorial Board are discouraged.


AUTHORS' RESPONSIBILITIES


91视频 Integrity

Authors should submit original work conducted honestly according to scientific standards. 91视频 results must not be fabricated, falsified, or dishonestly obtained. When writing, Authors should present a concise and accurate account of how the work was carried out with enough detail for other researchers to replicate the work. Data should be accurately reported without omission of problematic results. Authors must not claim originality if others have reported similar work.


Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are their original work and have not been submitted elsewhere simultaneously. Materials from other sources must be appropriately cited or quoted. The Journal employs plagiarism detection software to verify manuscript originality.
Plagiarism in all forms is unacceptable, including:

  • 1. Claiming others' papers as the Author's own
  • 2. Using or paraphrasing substantial parts of others' work without proper credit
  • 3. Claiming results from research conducted by others as Authors' own
  • 4. Self-plagiarism (reusing portions of previous writings without acknowledgment)
To avoid plagiarism, Authors should:
  • 1. Keep records of information sources
  • 2. Use quotation marks for verbatim phrases and cite sources
  • 3. Summarize or paraphrase in their own words with proper citation
  • 4. Cite all sources appropriately
  • 5. Give proper acknowledgment to the work of others


Publication Considerations

Multiple Submissions

Authors must not submit manuscripts that are under review by The Journal to other journals simultaneously. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical behaviour. Resubmission after rejection or withdrawal from another publication is acceptable. The manuscript must not have been previously published or accepted for publication elsewhere, either in whole or in part, in any language.


Conference Proceedings

The Journal does not accept submissions that have been published in full in conference proceedings. The Editor-in-Chief may consider unpublished work that has been presented in part in any forum, particularly if the circulation of the proceeding was limited. Authors must clarify the significant material added to the manuscript that was not included in any proceedings, and proceedings must be properly cited.


Conflicts of Interest

Authors should avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of such conflicts in their research and publication. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed, and a statement on conflict of interest must be included in the manuscript. Conflicts may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial in nature.


Manuscript Withdrawal

Authors may request withdrawal of a manuscript within two weeks from the date of initial submission by writing to the Editor-in-Chief with a reason. If an Author discovers a significant error in their published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in- Chief or publisher to retract or correct the article accordingly.


Timeliness

Authors should be prompt with manuscript revisions. If unable to meet the deadline, Authors should inform the Editor-in-Chief to request an extension.


Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Authors are encouraged to share raw data supporting their findings, following the principles of transparency and reproducibility in research. The Journal supports the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) data principles and recommends repositories such as Dryad and Zenodo for data storage. Data availability statements should be included in all published papers.


Artificial Intelligence (AI) Generated Text

Authors may use artificial intelligence (AI) to assist with research and writing. However, Authors must cite text or content generated through AI in all aspects of publication. In the Acknowledgment section, Authors should state which aspects of research and text were generated through AI, including research design, data analysis, data visualization, and illustration. The copyright of text generated through AI does not belong to the authors of the article, and AI-generated text should be clearly identified.


Inclusive Language

Authors should use inclusive, non-discriminatory language throughout their manuscripts. This includes avoiding assumptions about gender, cultural identities, and other characteristics that could be perceived as biased or exclusionary.


AUTHORSHIP CONDUCT


Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as Co-Authors, while others who have assisted in certain aspects of the research project can be acknowledged.


Authors should nominate one Author as the corresponding Author who is solely responsible for communicating with The Journal and facilitating communication between Co-Authors. All Authors included in the author鈥檚 list must agree to the order of names and the final form of the manuscript submitted.


Changes in Authorship

Once The Journal accepts a manuscript for publication, changes in authorship (addition, deletion, or rearrangement) are no longer allowed. However, such changes can be made during the review process before a manuscript is accepted.


Affiliation

The affiliation for each Author should be the institution where the majority of the work was performed. If an Author has subsequently transferred to another institution, the new address may also be included.


PERMISSIONS AND COPYRIGHT


Authors should check their manuscripts for copyright permissions, including those for quotations, figures, photographs, artwork, or tables taken or modified from other publications or online sources. Authors need to secure necessary permissions before submission to The Journal. Permission may be needed from both the publisher and the authors of the published materials.


91视频 (UKM) holds the copyright to all published articles in The Journal. The Author(s) should submit the Copyright Transfer form to the Editor-in-Chief once the manuscript has been accepted for publication.


The Journal supports open access and follows Creative Commons licensing policy. Authors retain certain rights under the Creative Commons Attribution License, unless otherwise stated in the copyright transfer agreement.


HUMAN, ANIMAL SUBJECTS AND BIOETHICS


Manuscripts must explicitly identify any works employing substances, processes, or equipment with special risks. Studies on live vertebrates and/or higher invertebrates require approval from the relevant ethics committee. Authors must verify that all studies were conducted in compliance with rules and regulations issued by the appropriate ethical committee.


Information about the institutional ethics committee that approved the experiments, along with details on how and why the model and animal species being used address the scientific objectives, must be included in the methods section. Studies should abide by all applicable institutional norms and national legal requirements.


For research involving human subjects, authors must indicate which ethics committee approved the study and submit a statement confirming all participants gave informed consent. The manuscript must include the reference number for the committee's approval.



PEER REVIEW PROCESS


Double-Blind Review

The Journal follows a double-blind peer-review process, whereby both the Authors and the Reviewers remain anonymous to each other. Peer review is fundamental to the scientific publication process and the dissemination of knowledge. Reviewers are experts chosen by the Editor-in-Chief to provide assessment of manuscripts, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the highest quality material for The Journal.


Reviewers evaluate papers without bias, avoiding personal criticisms of the Authors, and properly motivating their judgments. Their observations should be structured to improve the clarity of the paper, and any criticisms must be constructive.


Reviewer Selection and Reciprocity

Reviewing for journals is a professional activity that provides value for the field and should be encouraged. Authors who submit manuscripts to The Journal are normally expected to reciprocate by accepting invitations to review manuscripts.


Review Quality and Timeliness

Reviewers are assessed on the quality of their reviews and other performance characteristics by the Editor-in-Chief to ensure optimal journal quality. These ratings contribute to decisions on reappointment to The Journal's Editorial Board and ongoing review requests. Reviews should be professional, honest, courteous, prompt, and constructive. Reviewers should:

  • 1. Identify and comment on major strengths and weaknesses of experimental design and methods
  • 2. Comment accurately on the quality of the Author's interpretation of data
  • 3. Assess major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript
  • 4. Note any ethical concerns raised by the study
  • 5. Provide Authors with useful suggestions for improvement
  • 6. Maintain professionalism and avoid personal comments
  • 7. Focus on the work, not the Authors
  • 8. Provide context for the Editor-in-Chief to make a recommendation

Reviewers should complete reviews within four weeks. If unable to meet this deadline, they should inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately to determine whether an extension or a new reviewer is needed.


Decision Process

Based on reviewers' recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief makes one of the following decisions:

  • 1. Accept without revisions
  • 2. Accept with minor revisions
  • 3. Return for major modifications (revise and resubmit)
  • 4. Reject with encouragement for resubmission
  • 5. Reject outright (with reasons provided)

While reviewers recommend actions, the Editor-in-Chief may need to make decisions based on conflicting advice. The most useful reports provide the Editor-in-Chief with information on which a decision should be based.


APPEALS PROCESS


Authors who believe their manuscript was unfairly rejected may appeal the decision by writing to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days of receiving the rejection notice. The appeal should include a detailed justification explaining why the author disagrees with the decision. The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may consult with editorial board members not involved in the original decision. The final decision on the appeal rests with the Editor-in- Chief and will be communicated to the author within 60 days.


RESEARCH ETHICS & MISCONDUCT HANDLING


The Journal follows COPE's Best Practices for Investigating and Handling 91视频 Misconduct. If misconduct is detected, appropriate corrective actions will be taken, including retractions, corrections, or notifications to relevant institutions. Whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct will be protected from retaliation. Their identities will be kept confidential unless they explicitly agree to be identified, or disclosure is required by law.


POST-PUBLICATION MANAGEMENT


Amendments

Publications may require changes for various reasons. These modifications fall into four categories: erratum, corrigendum, retraction, and addendum.


Erratum

An erratum is a notification of a significant error made by The Journal during the publishing process that affects the publication record, scientific integrity, authors' reputations, or The Journal's reputation.


Corrigendum

A corrigendum corrects a significant error by the Author(s) that compromises the article's scientific integrity, publishing history, or reputations. Corrections submitted for publishing must be signed by all Authors.


Retraction

Authors can request article retraction for invalid results. A retraction detailing the error and explaining how conclusions are affected must be signed by all co-authors. Retractions are evaluated based on whether the article's primary conclusion is now false or substantially compromised.


Readers may write to the Editor-in-Chief if they believe a published work should be retracted. The Editor-in-Chief will consult with Reviewers and give the authors an opportunity to respond.


Addendum

An addendum is a peer-reviewed addition of material to an article, typically in response to a reader's request for clarification.


Post-Publication Discussion

The Journal encourages scholarly discussion of published articles. Comments on published articles may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief for consideration. Authors of the original article will be given an opportunity to respond to substantive criticisms. Both comments and responses may be published online linked to the original article.


Version Control

The Journal maintains a clear version control system for all published articles. When corrections or amendments are made, the article will clearly indicate:

  • 1. Date of the original publication
  • 2. Date(s) of any amendments
  • 3. Nature of the changes
  • 4. Reason for the changes

All versions will remain accessible in the journal's archive.


SOCIAL MEDIA AND PROMOTION POLICY


Authors are encouraged to promote their published work through appropriate channels, including social media, institutional websites, and academic networks. When promoting their work, authors should:

  • 1. Accurately represent the findings without exaggeration
  • 2. Include a link to the original article on the journal website
  • 3. Acknowledge all co-authors and contributors
  • 4. Disclose any conflicts of interest
  • 5. Respect embargo periods if applicable
The Journal may also promote selected articles through its own communication channels.

PREPRINT POLICY


The Journal accepts submissions that have previously appeared on preprint servers, provided that:

  • 1. The preprint is cited in the manuscript
  • 2. The preprint server DOI is provided
  • 3. The manuscript submitted represents a significant development beyond the preprint version
  • 4. The author retains the right to update the preprint with a link to the final published version

Authors should notify the Editor-in-Chief at submission if the manuscript has been posted on a preprint server.


FEE TRANSPARENCY


The Journal is committed to transparency regarding all fees associated with publication. Current information about article processing charges, submission fees, or any other costs to authors is available on the journal's website. Fee waiver and reduction policies for authors from low-income countries or with financial hardship are also clearly stated.


PENALTIES AND SANCTIONS


The Journal's Editorial Board has the sole responsibility and authority to determine appropriate sanctions for ethical violations. Given the serious nature of charges such as plagiarism, confidentiality must be maintained throughout the investigative process. In cases where the Editorial Board and UKM Publication Board determine that unethical conduct occurred, the manuscript will be rejected. If the article has already been published, it will be retracted promptly. Authors may be barred from submitting to The Journal for one to three years, depending on the nature of the misconduct.


Implications

For Authors

Work proven to contain plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material constitutes unethical behaviour. Depending on severity, sanctions may include:

  • 1. Notice to the Author(s) involved
  • 2. Rejection of the manuscript
  • 3. Retraction of published articles with appropriate notice
  • 4. Submission ban for up to 3 years
  • 5. Notification to the Authors' institution

For Editorial Board Members

Any member with proven unethical conduct will be dismissed from office. Additional penalties would typically include the same sanctions as for authors found guilty of misconduct.


CONTACT INFORMATION


For ethical concerns, complaints, or further clarifications, please contact the editorial office at apjitm@ukm.edu.my.


REFERENCES AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


These ethics guidelines have been developed in alignment with Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices: https://publicationethics.org.