About the Journal

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Our Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. As such, Jurnal Meteorologi dan Geofisika (JMG) follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

A selection of key points is included below, but you should always refer to the official COPE documents for full details.

Duties of Editors

• Fair play and editorial independence: Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

• Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff will 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. Editors must preserve the anonymity of reviewers.

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors' explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

• Publication decisions: The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo a strict double-blind peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published based on the validation of the work, its importance, reviewers' comments, and legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.

• Involvement and cooperation in investigations: Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Jurnal Meteorologi dan Geofisika editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct.

Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Jurnal Meteorologi dan Geofisika (JMG) shares the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

• Promptness: Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation.

• Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.

• Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

• Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript of which they have personal knowledge.

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the authors.

Duties of Authors

• Reporting standards: Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

• Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. Authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication.

• Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

• Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission: Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere and is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.

• Authorship of the manuscript: Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis of the study; (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper. Those who contributed but do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section.

• Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI tools (such as ChatGPT or similar Large Language Models) do not meet the requirements for authorship and must not be listed as authors. If authors use AI tools in the writing process, data analysis, or graphical creation, they must transparently disclose this in the methodology or acknowledgements section. Authors remain fully accountable for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the content generated by AI.

• Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Authors should at the earliest stage possible, disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed.

• Hazards and human or animal subjects: If the work involves unusual hazards, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors must ensure all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, and include a statement that informed consent was obtained.

• Peer review: Authors are obliged to participate in the double-blind peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval.

• Fundamental errors in published works: When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal's editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper.

Duties of the Publisher

• Handling of unethical publishing behaviour: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or the retraction of the affected work.

• Access to journal content: The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.

Sources & References

• ELSEVIER: Elsevier Publishing Ethics Resource Kit

• COPE: Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors

• COPE: Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

• COPE: Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Editors

• COPE: Short Guide to Ethical Editing for New Editors

• COPE: Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

• COPE: Retraction Guidelines

• COPE: Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers