Publication Ethics

Hasanuddin Journal of Animal Science (HAJAS) is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Hasanuddin. The journal respects publication ethics and works to prevent malpractice and research misconduct. This statement explains the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher. It follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including the COPE Core Practices and the COPE Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. The publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no influence on editorial decisions.

1. Responsibilities of authors

Originality and plagiarism. Submit only original work. Cite all sources whose data, text, or ideas you use, and use quotation marks for verbatim text. See the Plagiarism Policy.
Integrity. Present results clearly and honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data or images. Follow the rules of your discipline for acquiring, selecting, and processing data.
No multiple submission. Do not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, and do not split a single study into several parts to increase the number of papers (salami publishing). Disclose and justify any reuse of your own earlier material.
Citations. Cite relevant literature in support of your claims. Excessive or inappropriate self-citation, and coordinated citation among several authors, are discouraged.
Permissions. Make sure that you have permission to use software, questionnaires, and scales, and to reproduce copyrighted material.
Dual use and hazards. Identify clearly any research that could be misused to threaten public health or national security, and any unusual hazards of chemicals, procedures, or equipment.
Statements about people or organisations. Avoid untrue statements about an individual or company, and personal attacks.
Errors. If you find a significant error in your published article, tell the journal promptly and cooperate in correcting or retracting it. See the Corrections, Retractions and Post-Publication Discussion page.
Required statements. Include the Author Contribution, Competing Interest, Funding, Data Availability, Generative AI, and Ethical Clearance statements described in the Author Guidelines.

Authorship and contributorship

Authorship means a substantial contribution to the work and accountability for its content. A person is an author if all four conditions hold:

they made a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data, or created new software used in the work;
they drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content;
they approved the version to be published; and
they agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work, so that questions about its accuracy or integrity are properly investigated and resolved.

People who contributed but do not meet these conditions belong in the Acknowledgment. Honorary, guest, and ghost authorship are not accepted. The corresponding author must make sure the author list, order, and corresponding author are correct at submission and that all authors have approved the submission. Authors cannot be added or removed during revision without a detailed written reason approved by all authors and the Editor-in-Chief, and the author list cannot change after acceptance. Group authorship is allowed for large collaborations if individual contributions are defined. AI tools cannot be authors (see the Policy on Generative AI).

2. Responsibilities of editors

Independence. Make decisions on academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and fit with the scope, free from undue influence by the publisher, sponsors, or commercial interests.
Fairness. Evaluate manuscripts without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.
Confidentiality. Share information about a manuscript only with the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as needed. Do not use unpublished material from a manuscript in your own research without the author’s written consent.
Conflicts of interest. Step aside from manuscripts where you have a conflict of interest. See section 8.
Peer review. Make sure each manuscript is reviewed by qualified and independent reviewers (see the Peer Review Policy).
Integrity. No fast-track publication guarantees acceptance, and no Letter of Acceptance is issued before a manuscript is formally accepted. Do not take part in producing or brokering manuscripts, or in manipulating citations, metadata, or publication dates.
Misconduct. Act on allegations or evidence of misconduct as described in section 6, and correct the scholarly record when needed.
Use of AI. Follow the Policy on Generative AI.

3. Responsibilities of reviewers

Contribution. Help the editor make decisions and help authors improve their work.
Promptness and expertise. Decline if you lack the expertise or cannot review on time, and tell the editor.
Confidentiality. Treat manuscripts as confidential. Do not share, discuss, or use them, and do not upload them to any AI tool.
Objectivity. Give clear, reasoned, constructive comments without personal criticism. Do not ask authors to cite your own work unless it is genuinely needed.
Sources. Point out relevant published work that the authors have not cited, and any substantial similarity with other papers you know.
Conflicts of interest. Decline manuscripts where you have a competitive, collaborative, financial, or other conflict.
Concerns. Tell the editors if you notice plagiarism, fabricated or manipulated material, or other misconduct.

4. Responsibilities of the publisher

The Faculty of Animal Science, Universitas Hasanuddin, as publisher, supports the independence of the editors and the integrity of the scholarly record. It works with the editors to prevent and handle misconduct, supports corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions where needed, and supports training of editors and reviewers in publication ethics.

5. Research and publication misconduct

Misconduct includes the following. The journal applies these definitions when it assesses a case.

Fabrication: making up data or information.
Falsification: manipulating research data or information.
Plagiarism: taking another person’s work or ideas without proper credit; rewriting another person’s work without using one’s own words, even if the source is cited; or reusing one’s own published work without citing it.
Unauthorised authorship: listing a person who did not contribute, omitting a person who did, or having someone else write a paper without contributing oneself.
Undisclosed conflict of interest.
Multiple submission: submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal, leading to publication in more than one.
Other manipulation: citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, manipulation of metadata or publication dates, and breach of confidentiality.
Misuse of AI (see the Policy on Generative AI).

6. Allegations of misconduct

Anyone may tell the editors or editorial staff, at any time, of suspected misconduct, by giving the necessary information or evidence. The journal follows COPE guidance and flowcharts.

Initial assessment. The editors check whether the allegation is credible and consistent with the definition of misconduct, and whether the person making it has a conflict of interest.
Clarification. The corresponding author, on behalf of all authors, is asked to respond in detail. The accused is always given a chance to respond.
Investigation. The Editor-in-Chief decides, with the editors, whether to open an investigation, and may consult experts or the authors’ institution. Evidence is kept strictly confidential and shared only with those involved.
Decision. The case is classified as minor or serious misconduct.
Action. See below.

Minor misconduct is handled with those involved directly, for example by explaining the academic standard or by sending a warning letter.
Serious misconduct can lead, alone or together, to: rejection of the manuscript; a formal announcement or editorial about the misconduct; a formal letter to the author’s or reviewer’s head of department or employer; a correction, expression of concern, or retraction of the published article; a ban on submissions for a defined period; or referral to a professional body or legal authority.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions follow the procedure on the Corrections, Retractions and Post-Publication Discussion page.

7. Complaints and appeals

A complaint is an expression of dissatisfaction with the editorial process or a decision. An appeal is a formal request to reconsider a decision, usually a rejection. This procedure covers editorial decisions, peer review, ethical issues such as plagiarism or authorship disputes, and administrative matters such as publication delays.

Send complaints and appeals by email to the editorial office at hajasfapet@unhas.ac.id. Include the manuscript ID or title, a detailed description of the concern, and any supporting evidence. The office acknowledges receipt within 7 working days. The Editor-in-Chief and, where relevant, members of the editorial board investigate impartially and in confidence. The person who complained is told the outcome and the reasons in good time. All information is kept confidential.

8. Conflicts of interest

A conflict of interest exists when a personal, financial, professional, institutional, or other relationship could influence, or appear to influence, a person’s work or judgement.

Authors disclose all conflicts and sources of financial support in the manuscript, including a statement when there is none.
Reviewers disclose any relationship with the authors or the subject of the manuscript and decline the review if the conflict is significant.
Editors and editorial board members step aside from manuscripts where they have a conflict, and another editor handles them.
Manuscripts by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, or editorial board members are handled by an independent editor, reviewed like all other manuscripts, and the author takes no part in the decision. The handling editor is recorded in the editorial file.

9. Ethical oversight

Research on animals. Authors must confirm that ethical guidelines for animal welfare were followed, including approval from a relevant ethics committee. A statement must be in the manuscript.
Research on human participants. Research must follow recognised ethical standards, for example the Declaration of Helsinki, with approval from an institutional ethics committee stated in the manuscript.
Consent to publication. For identifiable human subjects, authors must obtain consent for publication and state this in the manuscript.
Vulnerable populations. Special care is needed, and consent from guardians must be obtained.