Wacana : Jurnal Bahasa, Seni, dan Pengajaran is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and taking all possible actions against any publication malpractice. The Editorial Board is responsible, among other things, for preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and Wacana : Jurnal Bahasa, Seni, dan Pengajaran does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles: affirm that the content of the manuscript is original. Furthermore, the submission implies that the manuscript has not been previously published in any language, in its entirety or in part, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, in Wacana : Jurnal Bahasa, Seni, dan Pengajaran, are fully committed to good publication practices and accept responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as outlined by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines available at http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Author's Responsibilities

1. Reporting Standards: Authors must present accurate reports of original research and provide an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or improper data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Deceptive or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable. Manuscripts must adhere to the journal's submission guidelines.
2. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. Manuscripts should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editor agrees to joint publication. Relevant prior work and publications, whether by other researchers or the authors, should be acknowledged and cited properly. Primary literature should be cited where possible. Directly taken original words from other researchers' publications must appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.
3. Multiple, Excessive, or Simultaneous Publications: Authors should generally not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. It is also expected that authors will not publish the same manuscript or research description in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publication behavior. Various publications arising from one research project should be clearly identified as such, and the primary publication must be referenced.
4. Source Acknowledgment: Authors should be aware of all data sources used in the research and cite influential publications that determined the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided.
5. Paper Authorship: The writing of research publications must accurately reflect individual contributions to the work and its reporting. Writing should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study reported. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where the major contributor is listed as an author while those who have contributed less substantively, or purely technically, to the research or publication are mentioned in the acknowledgment section. Authors should also ensure that all authors have seen and approved the submitted manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be interpreted to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in the submitted manuscript, they must promptly inform the journal's editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Editor's Responsibilities

1. Publication Decisions: Based on the editorial board's review reports, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the editorial board's journal policies and is constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions. Editors are responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and to maintain the integrity of the published record.
2. Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for its authenticity. The editor must organize and use peer review fairly and judiciously. The editor should explain their peer review process in information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. The editor must use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting individuals with adequate expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that every manuscript submitted to the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to gender, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author. An essential part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the enforcement of editorial independence and integrity. Editors hold a strong position in making publication decisions, making it crucial that the process is fair and free from bias.
4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding the manuscript submitted by the author is kept confidential. The editor should critically assess any potential data protection and patient confidentiality violations. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the research presented and consent for publication if applicable.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in making decisions regarding papers that have a conflict of interest.

Reviewer's Responsibilities

1. Confidentiality: Information about the manuscript submitted by the author must be kept confidential and treated as protected information. They should not be shown or discussed with others except as allowed by the editor.
2. Source Acknowledgment: Reviewers should ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statements wherein observations, derivations, or arguments have been reported previously should be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should promptly inform the journal if they find any deviations, have concerns regarding the ethical aspects of the work, know of substantial similarity between the manuscript and simultaneous submission to another journal or published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during the research or manuscript preparation and submission. Reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not investigate further personally unless the journal requests additional information or advice.
3. Objectivity Standards: Review of submitted manuscripts should be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's specific feedback guidelines, unless there is a good reason not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscript. Reviewers should explain which additional investigation is important to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration, which will only strengthen or extend the work.
4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Information or special insights obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts that have conflicts of interest due to competition, collaboration, or relationships or connections with the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper. In the case of double-blind reviews, if they suspect the author's identity, notify the journal if this knowledge raises the potential for a conflict of interest.
5. Timeliness: Reviewers should respond within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are reasonably confident they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed-upon timeframe, notifying the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it's impossible to complete the manuscript review within the specified time, this information should be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.