Publication Ethics Statement

Research Integrity & Responsible Publishing

Publication Ethics Statement

Blockchain, Artificial Intelligence, and Future Research (BAFR) is committed to maintaining the integrity, transparency, independence, fairness, and reliability of the scholarly record. These principles apply to authors, editors, reviewers, the publisher, and all parties involved in the journal's publication process.

Ethical Framework

BAFR's publication-ethics framework is informed by internationally recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing, particularly the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices . Reference to COPE guidance describes the ethical framework used by the journal and does not, by itself, constitute a claim of COPE membership.

Policy Overview
Editorial Independence Editors Reviewers Authors Authorship Generative AI Research Ethics Data Integrity Competing Interests Misconduct Complaints & Appeals Corrections & Retractions

1. General Principles

BAFR publishes scholarly work on the basis of academic merit, originality, methodological and analytical rigor, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal's aims and scope, and contribution to the scholarly community.

The journal does not tolerate practices that compromise the integrity of the scholarly record, including plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate or redundant publication, inappropriate authorship, citation manipulation, undisclosed competing interests, peer-review manipulation, or other forms of research and publication misconduct.

2. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial, financial, political, institutional, personal, or other inappropriate external influence.

WISE Pendidikan Indonesia, as the publisher, supports the journal's publishing infrastructure while respecting the independence of editors in decisions concerning manuscript evaluation, peer review, acceptance, rejection, correction, and retraction.

Editorial principle: fees, sponsorship, advertising, institutional relationships, author identity, academic status, nationality, or ability to pay must not determine the editorial outcome of a manuscript.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are expected to:

  • evaluate manuscripts fairly and consistently on scholarly merit;
  • protect the confidentiality of submitted and unpublished material;
  • select reviewers on the basis of relevant expertise and independence;
  • avoid discrimination based on characteristics unrelated to scholarly merit;
  • identify, disclose, and appropriately manage competing interests;
  • recuse themselves when impartial editorial judgment cannot reasonably be maintained;
  • investigate credible ethical concerns before or after publication;
  • maintain the integrity of the peer-review and editorial process; and
  • take appropriate post-publication action when the reliability of the scholarly record requires it.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

  • accept assignments only when they have appropriate expertise and sufficient time;
  • provide objective, evidence-based, constructive, and professionally expressed assessments;
  • maintain confidentiality throughout and after the review process;
  • not use unpublished ideas, data, methods, or findings for personal or professional advantage;
  • declare actual, potential, or perceived competing interests promptly;
  • decline an assignment when impartial assessment cannot reasonably be provided;
  • notify editors of suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, or other irregularities; and
  • submit reviews within the agreed timeframe or promptly notify the editorial office when this is not possible.
Confidentiality and AI: reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, figures, data, supplementary files, reviewer reports, or confidential editorial communications to external generative-AI systems where confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, or data control cannot be assured.

5. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for the integrity of the work they submit and publish. Authors must:

  • present research honestly, accurately, and transparently;
  • ensure that data, evidence, images, quotations, and references are authentic and appropriately represented;
  • not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, suppress, or selectively misrepresent findings;
  • submit original work and appropriately acknowledge all relevant sources;
  • not submit substantially the same manuscript simultaneously to another journal;
  • disclose related publications, preprints, datasets, conference papers, or other overlapping material where relevant;
  • disclose funding sources and relevant competing interests;
  • obtain appropriate ethical approval and informed consent when required;
  • ensure that all listed authors satisfy the journal's authorship requirements; and
  • cooperate with legitimate editorial requests for clarification, documentation, data, authorship information, or research-integrity verification.

6. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantive scholarly contribution to the work and who accept responsibility for the content for which they are accountable.

Guest, honorary, gift, purchased, or ghost authorship is not acceptable. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately rather than listed as authors.

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be justified and agreed to by all affected authors. Significant authorship changes after acceptance will be reviewed carefully and may require supporting documentation.

Emerging Publishing Practice

7. Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Generative-AI systems and other AI-assisted technologies do not qualify for authorship because they cannot accept responsibility, provide consent, disclose competing interests, or be accountable for the integrity of a published work.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, interpretations, and integrity of all manuscript content, including content developed or refined with AI-assisted tools.

Material use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation, analysis, generation, or substantial revision of scholarly content should be transparently disclosed in accordance with the journal's author guidelines or declaration requirements. Routine spelling, grammar, and formatting assistance need not be presented as authorship or intellectual contribution.

8. Ethical Oversight of Research

Research must comply with applicable ethical, legal, institutional, and disciplinary requirements.

Where relevant, authors should report:

  • the approving ethics committee or institutional review board;
  • an approval or protocol number where available;
  • informed-consent procedures or a justified waiver or exemption;
  • measures used to protect privacy, confidentiality, welfare, and participant rights;
  • ethical safeguards concerning vulnerable populations or sensitive data; and
  • approval and welfare procedures for research involving animals where applicable.

9. Data Integrity and Reproducibility

Authors should preserve the integrity of the research record and report methods and evidence with sufficient transparency to permit scholarly assessment and, where appropriate, reproduction or verification of the work.

Editors may request underlying data, code, documentation, instruments, ethical approvals, or other supporting materials when reasonably necessary to evaluate the validity or integrity of a submission or published article. Confidential, proprietary, personal, or legally restricted information should be handled appropriately.

10. Conflicts of Interest and Competing Interests

A competing interest exists when a financial, personal, professional, academic, institutional, ideological, or other relationship could reasonably be perceived as influencing judgment concerning a manuscript or published work.

  • Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial competing interests.
  • Reviewers must declare interests that could affect impartiality and decline review when appropriate.
  • Editors must recuse themselves from manuscripts where an appropriate independent editorial decision cannot reasonably be ensured.

11. Allegations of Research and Publication Misconduct

BAFR takes credible allegations seriously whether concerns arise before publication, during peer review, or after publication. Concerns may involve fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate authorship, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, unethical research, undisclosed competing interests, or other practices that undermine the scholarly record.

Allegations will be assessed fairly and confidentially. The journal may request clarification or supporting evidence from relevant parties and, where appropriate, cooperate with authors' institutions, research-integrity offices, funders, publishers, or other responsible bodies. Actions will be proportionate to the available evidence and the need to protect the scholarly record.

12. Integrity of Peer Review

Manuscripts that proceed beyond editorial screening are evaluated through the journal's established peer-review process. Reviewer selection is based primarily on relevant expertise, independence, and the absence of disqualifying competing interests.

Further details are available in the Peer Review Process .

13. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, or other stakeholders may raise concerns regarding editorial procedures, publication ethics, peer review, or published content. Complaints should identify the relevant manuscript or article and provide sufficient information to permit appropriate assessment.

Appeals against editorial decisions should present a reasoned scholarly basis for reconsideration rather than merely disagreement with the outcome. Where appropriate, complaints or appeals will be considered by an editor who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision.

14. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

BAFR is committed to preserving an accurate and trustworthy scholarly record. When an error or concern affecting a published article is identified, the journal will evaluate the seriousness and scope of the issue and determine an appropriate post-publication response.

Depending on the circumstances, this may include a correction, editorial notice, expression of concern, or retraction. Retraction is used to correct the scholarly record when findings or content are no longer sufficiently reliable, rather than primarily as a punitive measure.

15. Intellectual Property and Copyright

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted material does not unlawfully infringe copyright, intellectual-property rights, privacy rights, or other applicable legal rights. Appropriate permission must be obtained for third-party material when required.

Copyright and licensing arrangements are described in the Copyright Notice .

16. Confidentiality and Privacy

Manuscripts under consideration, peer-review reports, reviewer identities where protected by the review model, editorial communications, unpublished data, and other confidential material must be handled appropriately. Personal information collected through the journal platform will be used for legitimate journal and publishing purposes in accordance with the journal's privacy policy.

Disclaimer

Views, interpretations, findings, and conclusions expressed in articles published in BAFR are those of the respective authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors, editorial board, or publisher. Publication does not constitute endorsement of products, services, organizations, technologies, or opinions discussed in an article.

Research Integrity Contact

Reporting an Ethical Concern

Questions, complaints, appeals, or credible concerns regarding research or publication integrity may be submitted confidentially to the BAFR Editorial Office at bafr.journal@wiseedu.co.id .