Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Duties of Editors
Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship Criteria and Contributorship Policy
Libraria: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi follows the authorship guidelines established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). To be credited as an author, an individual must meet all four of the following criteria:
-
Substantial Contributions: Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work.
-
Drafting or Critical Revision: Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
-
Final Approval: Final approval of the version to be published.
-
Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Non-Author Contributors: Contributors who do not meet all four criteria above (e.g., those providing financial support, general administrative or technical assistance, or language editing) should not be listed as authors. Instead, their contributions must be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript. Libraria: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi strictly prohibits ghost authorship (omitting eligible contributors) and gift/honorary authorship (including individuals who made no intellectual contribution).
Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Corrections and Retractions
In cases where serious errors, research misconduct, plagiarism, or unethical research practices are identified, the journal may issue a retraction of the article. Retraction notices will clearly state the reason for the retraction and will remain permanently linked to the original article to ensure transparency in the scholarly record.
AI Policy (Artificial Intelligence Usage Policy)
LIBRARIA: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi strictly regulates the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies across all stages of the publication process—including authorship, editing, and peer review—in accordance with scholarly publishing ethics (COPE/STM) and Permendiktisaintek No. 9/2026 accreditation standards.
1. Policy for Authors
- Authors must explicitly disclose any utilization of AI tools in the manuscript preparation process in the "Declaration of Generative AI" section before the References.
- AI tools cannot be listed as an author or co-author (non-authorship).
- The use of AI is restricted to language editing, grammar improvement, or technical processing. AI must not replace the authors' intellectual analysis, data interpretation, or original scholarly writing.
- Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and confidentiality of their submitted work.
2. Policy for Editors
- Editors may use AI tools solely for administrative support, proofreading, or technical formatting tasks.
- AI technologies must not replace human editorial judgment, scientific evaluation, or final editorial decisions (e.g., manuscript acceptance or rejection).
- Editors are strictly prohibited from uploading unpublished manuscripts into generative AI platforms to preserve author confidentiality and intellectual property rights.
- Editors remain fully accountable for all editorial decisions and the overall integrity of published content.
3. Policy for Peer Reviewers
- Peer reviewers are strictly prohibited from using AI technologies to analyze, evaluate, or generate review reports and comments.
- Reviewers must not upload, input, or copy any part of submitted manuscripts into AI applications or online generative AI tools, as this violates manuscript confidentiality and copyright laws.
- Reviewers are required to provide their independent, human expert analysis and critical evaluation for all reviewed manuscripts.
Handling Misconduct and Allegations
Libraria: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi takes all allegations of scientific misconduct (including plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, duplicate submission, and unethical AI usage) very seriously. The editorial team handles allegations in accordance with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Flowcharts.
1. Investigation Process
- When an allegation of misconduct or ethical breach is raised by readers, reviewers, or editorial board members, the Editor-in-Chief will initiate a formal investigation.
- The editorial board will examine the evidence objectively and contact the author(s) to request an official explanation and original supporting data.
2. Editorial Actions and Sanctions
If misconduct is confirmed based on the investigation, Libraria: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi may impose one or more of the following actions depending on the severity of the offense:
- Rejection: Immediate rejection of the submitted manuscript.
- Retraction: Formal retraction of the published article, accompanied by a published Retraction Notice detailing the reasons.
- Temporary/Permanent Ban: Suspension or prohibition of the author(s) from submitting future manuscripts to Libraria: Jurnal Ilmu Perpustakaan dan Informasi for a designated period (e.g., 1–3 years).
- Institutional Notification: Notification sent to the author's home institution or funding agency regarding the ethical violation.
