PUBLICATION ETHICS

AXIOM : Jurnal Pendidikan dan Matematika is a peer-reviewed journal published twice a year by the Mathematics Education Department, Tarbiyah and Teacher Training Faculty, Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, Indonesia. This statement sets out the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in publishing an article in the journal: authors, reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief and editorial board, and the publisher. It is based on the COPE Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics.

Ethical Principles
Publication in a peer-reviewed journal is a cornerstone of a reliable body of knowledge. It reflects the quality of the authors’ work and of the institutions that support them. All parties are expected to act with honesty, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and accountability. The publisher takes seriously its responsibility for all stages of publication.

1. Duties of Authors

  • Accuracy and reporting standards. Authors present an accurate account of the research and an objective discussion of its significance. Methods, data, and findings are reported with enough detail and references for others to evaluate and replicate the work. Fabrication, falsification, and knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
  • Data access, retention, and reproducibility. Authors keep the underlying data for a reasonable period after publication, provide it for editorial assessment when requested, and, where feasible and ethically permissible, make it available as described in our Data Availability Policy.
  • Originality and plagiarism. Authors submit original work. Words, ideas, data, and other material from other sources, including the authors’ own earlier work, must be acknowledged and quoted correctly (see our Plagiarism Policy).
  • Multiple, redundant, and concurrent publication. Authors do not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, or publish essentially the same research more than once. Where several publications arise from one project, their relationship is disclosed and the earlier publications are cited.
  • Acknowledgment of sources. Authors cite the works that influenced their research and cite only sources they have actually read.
  • Authorship. Authorship is limited to those who made a substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the research (see our Authorship Criteria). Other contributors are acknowledged. The corresponding author ensures that all authors are listed, that no one is listed inappropriately, and that all authors approved the final version and its submission.
  • Conflicts of interest and funding. Authors disclose financial and non-financial interests that could influence, or be seen to influence, their work, and all sources of funding (see our Conflict of Interest policy).
  • Research ethics and participants. Studies involving people, such as students, teachers, or schools, must follow applicable ethical requirements. Authors obtain ethical approval where it is required, and informed consent from participants (and permission from parents or guardians and from schools or institutions where participants are minors), and protect participants’ privacy and confidentiality. Evidence of ethical compliance is provided when requested.
  • Use of AI tools. Authors follow our AI Use Policy, which applies from the editorial process of Volume 15 Number 2 (2026). AI tools cannot be listed as authors, and authors remain fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts.
  • Communication. Authors respond to reviewers’ and editors’ comments professionally and on time, and respond to credible comments on their published work (see our Post-Publication Discussion).
  • Errors and withdrawal. Authors promptly notify the editor when they find a significant error in a submitted or published work and cooperate in its correction or retraction (see our Corrections and Retractions policy). Authors who wish to withdraw a manuscript inform the editor in writing.

2. Duties of Reviewers

  • Contribution to decisions. Reviewers give independent, constructive, and timely assessments that help editors decide and help authors improve their manuscripts.
  • Promptness. Reviewers accept an assignment only if they have the expertise and can finish within the agreed time, and tell the editor promptly if they need more time or cannot complete the review.
  • Confidentiality. Manuscripts and all information from peer review are confidential and are not shared or discussed without the editor’s permission. Reviewers do not upload manuscripts or review reports into AI tools (see our AI Use Policy).
  • Objectivity. Reviews are impartial, evidence-based, and free of personal criticism of the authors, with clear reasoning for each comment.
  • Sources and integrity. Reviewers point out relevant uncited work and tell the editor, in confidence, about substantial overlap with other publications, questionable research practices, or possible ethical problems. They do not investigate suspected misconduct on their own unless the editor asks them to.
  • Conflicts of interest. Reviewers disclose any conflict of interest and decline or withdraw if they cannot be impartial. They do not use information or ideas obtained through review for personal advantage. Where review is blind, a reviewer who believes they have identified an author, and sees a conflict in this, tells the editor.

3. Duties of Editors

  • Publication decisions. Editors decide on acceptance, revision, or rejection based on a manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, validity, significance, and fit with the journal’s scope, taking reviewers’ assessments into account and observing legal requirements on defamation, copyright, and plagiarism. Editors do not promise or guarantee acceptance or fast-track publication, and do not issue an acceptance letter before a manuscript is formally accepted.
  • Screening and peer review. Editors check submissions for originality and suitability before review, choose reviewers with suitable expertise and no relevant conflict of interest, and manage the review process fairly and transparently (see our Review Process Policy).
  • Fairness and independence. Editors evaluate manuscripts without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or political views. Editorial decisions are independent of personal relationships, institutional affiliations, commercial interests, and external pressure.
  • Citation practices. Editors and reviewers do not require authors to cite their own work or the journal’s articles unless this is scientifically justified.
  • Confidentiality. Editors protect the confidentiality of manuscripts, author information, reviewers’ identities, and editorial communication. They do not upload confidential material into AI tools (see our AI Use Policy). They also consider concerns about personal data and participant consent.
  • Conflicts of interest. Editors disclose conflicts of interest and do not take part in decisions where their impartiality could be affected; such manuscripts are handled by an independent editor (see our Conflict of Interest policy). Unpublished material in a submitted manuscript is not used in an editor’s own research without the author’s written consent.
  • Integrity of the scholarly record. Editors act on credible concerns about research or publication misconduct, and ensure that corrections, retractions, or other notices are issued when needed (see our Research Misconduct Allegation procedure and Corrections and Retractions policy).

4. Duties of the Publisher
The publisher respects the editors’ independence in editorial decisions. It supports the journal with the resources and procedures needed to apply this statement, supports the training and development of editors and reviewers, maintains the integrity and long-term availability of the published record.

5. Raising a Concern or Complaint
Ethical concerns, complaints about the editorial process or an editorial decision, and reports of suspected misconduct may be sent to jurnalaxiom@uinsu.ac.id. Suspected misconduct is handled under our Research Misconduct Allegation procedure. Complaints about the editorial process are considered by the Editor-in-Chief or, where they concern the Editor-in-Chief, by the publisher.