Equator Science Journal (ESJ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. This statement sets out the ethical standards expected of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board members, reviewers, and the publisher, CV. Dharma Samakta Edukhatulistiwa. It also explains how the journal handles allegations of research misconduct. This statement is guided by the principles and best practices promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The publication of articles in ESJ contributes to the development of a credible, coherent, and respected body of knowledge in science education and related fields. Published articles reflect the quality of the scholarly work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Because peer-reviewed publication is an essential part of academic communication, all parties involved in the publication process are expected to uphold high ethical standards.
As the publisher of ESJ, CV. Dharma Samakta Edukhatulistiwa takes its responsibility seriously at every stage of the publication process. The publisher is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, or other sources of revenue. The editorial process must remain fair, transparent, and academically grounded.
Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to, fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, data manipulation, unethical authorship practices, and other serious violations of research and publication ethics in the conduct, reporting, review, or publication of research.
When research misconduct is suspected in a submitted or published manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board have a duty to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. ESJ will examine allegations seriously, fairly, and confidentially, following COPE-informed procedures where appropriate.
If a submitted manuscript is found to contain misconduct, the manuscript will be rejected. If a published article is later found to involve misconduct or serious ethical violation, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or retraction and replacement, depending on the nature and severity of the case.
The initial stage of handling an allegation involves determining whether the claim is credible and whether it falls within the scope of research misconduct or serious publication ethics concerns. If necessary, the journal will request a detailed explanation from the corresponding author on behalf of all co-authors. Additional expert review, including methodological or statistical evaluation, may be sought when required.
Authors’ institutions may also be contacted when the matter requires formal investigation beyond the journal’s authority. ESJ expects institutions to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations when serious misconduct is suspected. The journal, the authors, and the institutions share responsibility for preserving the validity and integrity of the academic record.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which manuscripts submitted to ESJ should be published. Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, clarity, methodological rigor, relevance to the journal’s scope, and significance to readers and researchers.
Editors may consult members of the Editorial Board and reviewers in making publication decisions. Decisions are also guided by journal policies and by applicable legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, plagiarism, and other relevant matters.
ESJ provides a procedure for handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, peer review, journal management, editorial conduct, reviewer conduct, publication ethics, and possible conflicts of interest.
Complaints may concern matters such as delays in editorial handling, unfair editorial decisions, inappropriate reviewer behavior, peer review manipulation, citation coercion, or ethical concerns regarding published articles. All complaints and appeals will be handled carefully, objectively, and in a timely manner. The journal will evaluate each case based on available evidence and, where relevant, in line with COPE guidance.
ESJ welcomes responsible academic discussion after publication. When warranted, post-publication matters may be addressed through letters to the editor, correction notices, expressions of concern, or retractions. The journal is committed to correcting the scholarly record when significant errors or ethical problems are identified after publication.
Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit, intellectual content, and relevance to the journal, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or political philosophy.
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. Information obtained during the editorial and review process must be treated as confidential.
Editors and editorial staff must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the author’s explicit written consent. Any editor or reviewer with a conflict of interest relating to a manuscript must withdraw from involvement in the editorial or review process for that manuscript.
Peer review supports editors in making publication decisions and also helps authors improve the quality, clarity, and scholarly contribution of their manuscripts.
Any reviewer who feels unqualified to review the manuscript, or who knows that timely review will not be possible, should notify the editor promptly and decline the review invitation.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the manuscript content for personal or professional advantage without authorization from the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, fairly, and constructively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support their evaluations with reasoned arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. They should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity, overlap, or duplication between the manuscript under review and other published or submitted works known to them.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, institutional, financial, or other relationships with the authors or related organizations.
Authors of original research articles must present an accurate and honest account of the work performed, together with an objective discussion of its significance. The manuscript must contain sufficient detail, appropriate references, and transparent reporting to allow others to understand, evaluate, and, where applicable, replicate the study. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
Authors may be asked to provide raw data, supporting materials, or additional documentation for editorial review. Authors should retain research data for a reasonable period after publication and, where appropriate, facilitate data transparency and reproducibility in accordance with ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.
Authors must ensure that their submitted work is original. If they use the work, words, data, or ideas of others, these must be properly cited or quoted. Plagiarism in any form constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Authors should not submit the same manuscript, or manuscripts describing essentially the same research, to more than one journal at the same time. Redundant or duplicate publication is unacceptable unless fully disclosed and editorially justified.
Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others and cite publications that have influenced the conception, design, analysis, or interpretation of the reported study.
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant scholarly contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the study. All persons who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.
The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all eligible co-authors are included, that no inappropriate authors are listed, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission.
All authors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or other substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of funding and other support for the research must be clearly stated.
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published article, the author must promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article where necessary.
If the research involves human participants, animals, hazardous chemicals, sensitive procedures, confidential data, or special equipment with unusual risks, authors must clearly state how ethical and legal requirements were met. Where applicable, authors must provide evidence of ethical approval, informed consent, institutional permission, or other relevant documentation.
If the research involves confidential, proprietary, organizational, or business-related data, authors must explain clearly how confidentiality, consent, and data protection have been managed.
ESJ supports responsible research transparency and encourages authors, where appropriate, to share research data, instruments, protocols, analytical methods, and other relevant materials that can support verification, reproducibility, and further scholarly use. Data sharing should always consider ethical, legal, privacy, and institutional limitations.
All manuscripts submitted to Equator Science Journal (ESJ) must be original and free from plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts must not have been previously published, and must not be under review or scheduled for publication elsewhere.
The authors are fully responsible for the originality of the manuscript and for ensuring that all borrowed ideas, data, words, figures, and other materials are properly cited.
To prevent plagiarism and other forms of textual duplication, all submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism detection software such as Turnitin, iThenticate, or other similar tools. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism, substantial unattributed overlap, fabricated citations, or other serious ethical breaches may be rejected immediately. Depending on the severity of the violation, the journal may impose sanctions, including temporary or permanent restrictions on future submissions.
| People |
| Editorial Team |
| Reviewers |
| Contact |
| Policies |
| Focus and Scope |
| Journal History |
| Indexing and Abstracting |
| Peer Review Policy |
| Publication Frequency |
| Open Access Policy |
| Archiving Policy |
| Deposit Policy |
| Publication Ethics and Misconduct |
| Withdrawal of Manuscript |
| Screening for Plagiarism |
| Correction and Retraction |
| Article Publication Charge |
| Revenue Source |
| Declaration of Generative AI Sources |
| Submission |
| Author Guidelines |
| Copyright Notice |
| Privacy Statement |
| Manuscript Template |
| Visitor |
Dharma Samakta Edukatulistiwa (DSE)
Mailing Address:
CV. Dharma Samakta Edukatulistiwa
Jl. R. H. Didi Sukardi, Komp. SMAN 1 Kota Sukabumi, Indonesia
Phone: +62 857-5915-5966
Email: [email protected]
Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
