Publication Ethics

INCOME expects authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher to act honestly, fairly, and transparently. These policies are informed by publication-ethics guidance, including resources from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Authors' responsibilities

Report methods and findings accurately, acknowledge limitations, distinguish evidence from interpretation, and cite the work of others appropriately. Fabrication, falsification, manipulated evidence, plagiarism, inappropriate authorship, and deliberate misrepresentation are unacceptable.

Do not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously or present substantially overlapping work as independent new research without disclosure and justification. Disclose relevant preprints, conference papers, theses, and related manuscripts in the cover letter so that the editor can assess overlap.

Research ethics, consent, and confidentiality

Research involving participants must follow applicable institutional and research-ethics requirements. Where required, identify the approving committee and approval reference. If review was waived or not required, explain the basis and the authority responsible for that determination.

Explain relevant consent procedures for surveys, interviews, experiments, and identifiable case material. Protect participants' identities and confidential organizational information. Permission to access a company or dataset does not replace participant consent or other ethical requirements where these apply.

Data availability and reproducibility

Describe data sources and analysis transparently and retain records sufficient to address reasonable editorial queries, subject to applicable consent, privacy, and retention requirements. Include a data availability statement explaining where supporting data or materials can be accessed, or why access is restricted. Do not disclose personal information, commercially confidential material, or data that authors are not authorized to share.

Conflicts of interest and funding

Disclose financial and non-financial relationships that could reasonably influence, or be perceived to influence, the research or its evaluation. Relevant interests may include employment, consultancy, ownership interests, paid advisory work, personal relationships, academic rivalry, and close professional collaboration.

Identify funding sources and describe the funder's role in study design, data collection, analysis, writing, and the decision to submit. A disclosed interest does not automatically prevent publication; it must be assessed and managed.

Where accurate, authors may state: “The authors declare no competing interests relevant to this work.” Do not use this statement when a relevant interest exists.

Editors' and reviewers' responsibilities

Evaluate manuscripts on scholarly merit, keep unpublished materials confidential, and provide constructive, evidence-based assessments. Do not use information obtained through editorial work for personal advantage or request citations merely to increase citation counts.

Editors and reviewers must disclose relevant interests and decline or withdraw from affected decisions. Submissions involving an editor, board member, close collaborator, or institutional colleague must be handled by an editor without a relevant conflict, using independent reviewers. The affected person must not select reviewers or decide the outcome.

Originality and plagiarism screening

Manuscripts are assessed for originality during editorial screening and may be checked again following revision or when a concern arises. Text-similarity tools support this assessment; they do not determine whether plagiarism has occurred.

Editors examine the location, source, attribution, and significance of overlap. A similarity percentage alone is neither proof of misconduct nor a guarantee of originality. Plagiarism may involve translated text, ideas, data, figures, or inappropriate reuse of an author's own earlier material.

Limited attribution problems may require correction. Substantial plagiarism, deceptive duplication, or other serious integrity concerns may lead to rejection or, for published work, correction or retraction following investigation. Authors will normally be given an opportunity to respond.

Responsible use of AI

Disclose substantive use of generative AI in developing text, code, images, or analysis, naming the tool and describing its purpose and the authors' verification. Routine spelling and grammar checks do not require a separate declaration. AI use in research methods must be described sufficiently for assessment. Do not fabricate data or references or upload confidential manuscripts or participant information to external AI services without appropriate authorization. An AI-detector score alone is not sufficient evidence of misconduct.

Allegations, complaints, and appeals

Send a concern to the editorial office with the manuscript identifier or article DOI, a clear explanation, and supporting evidence. The editor checks the available information, seeks relevant responses, protects confidentiality as far as reasonably possible, and may consult independent experts or the appropriate institution.

A complaint involving the Editor-in-Chief should be marked for the publisher, LPPM Universitas KH. A. Wahab Hasbullah, so that it can be assigned independently. Authors may appeal a decision by explaining a specific factual or procedural error and supplying supporting evidence. An uninvolved editor or qualified adviser will assess the appeal; disagreement alone does not establish an error.

The publisher supports the integrity of the scholarly record and must not allow fees, sponsorship, advertising, or institutional interests to determine editorial outcomes. Confirmed concerns are addressed proportionately, with decisions and any necessary public notices documented.