Conflict of Interest Policy

Safeguarding Objectivity and Transparency in Jurnal Kanayagan
 

Jurnal Kanayagan requires all stakeholders—authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher—to transparently disclose any interests that could compromise, or appear to compromise, the objectivity of their work. While possessing a conflict of interest (CoI) does not inherently imply wrongdoing, concealed conflicts severely undermine the integrity of scholarly research. Transparent disclosure empowers all parties to evaluate the work accurately. This policy aligns strictly with the COPE Core Practices and ICMJE Recommendations. Guiding Principle: When in doubt, disclose.

1. Defining Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest occurs when professional judgment regarding a scholarly work may be biased by secondary interests. These can encompass:

  • Financial: Funding, grants, salaries, consultancy fees, or stakes in organizations that may gain or lose from the publication.
  • Institutional: Affiliations with entities (e.g., ministries, schools, NGOs) whose programs are evaluated in the study.
  • Political & Ideological: Active advocacy or campaign roles directly related to the article's subject matter.
  • Personal & Professional: Family ties, close friendships, rivalries, or direct supervisory relationships.
  • Academic: A strong bias toward a specific theory, curriculum, or assessment tool co-developed by the author or reviewer.
  • Researcher–Participant Dynamics: Evaluating one's own students, colleagues, or institution, which may affect analytical objectivity or participant autonomy.

2. Author Responsibilities & Disclosure

Obligations: Authors must declare all relevant financial and non-financial interests from the past three years or anticipated future interests. Funding sources must be fully detailed, and researcher-participant dynamics must be explicitly addressed in the Methodology section to explain how ethical risks were mitigated.

How to Disclose: Complete the Disclosure Statement provided in the journal's manuscript template. During the double-blind review phase, disclosures must be strictly anonymized (e.g., "[Funder name removed for peer review]"). Substantive conflicts or reviewer exclusion requests should also be noted in the OJS 'Comments for the Editor'.

Example Statements:
  • "The first author is employed by [Organization], whose program is evaluated herein. The organization had no role in data interpretation."
  • "The second author co-developed the assessment instrument used but receives no financial benefit from its application."
  • "No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s)." (Use this if no conflict exists).

3. Reviewer & Editor Obligations

Reviewers: Must immediately decline invitations if they recognize the authors, share institutional affiliations, have collaborated within the last three years, possess competing financial/academic interests, or harbor personal ties. Reviewers are strictly prohibited from utilizing unpublished manuscript data for personal gain or coercing authors into unnecessary self-citations.

Editors: Must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where any conflict exists. Editors and board members provide an annual declaration of interests. Furthermore, manuscripts authored by current editors or board members are handled completely independently by external editors to ensure a rigorous, unbiased double-blind review process, with a formal note appended upon publication.

4. Publisher's Role & Handling Violations

Editorial Independence: The publisher (Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia) guarantees absolute editorial independence. Commercial, financial (including APCs), or institutional variables do not dictate or influence editorial decisions.

Handling Undisclosed Conflicts: If a concealed conflict is identified, the Editor-in-Chief will launch a formal inquiry. Consequences vary based on severity: manuscripts currently under review may require reassessment by independent reviewers or face immediate rejection. For published articles, the journal may issue a formal Corrigendum or, if the findings are severely compromised, a Retraction. Deliberate concealment is processed under the journal's Research Misconduct policy.