Journal of ProSport is national scientific journals that are open to seeking innovation, creativity, and novelty. To that extent, it clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the article publication of Journal of ProSport including the authors, the chief editors, the Editorial Boards, the peer-reviewers­­­­­ and the publishers (Universitas Bung Hatta).

The Editorial Board is responsible, among the other, for deciding which of the research papers/articles submitted to the journal should be published andpreventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable and the Journal of ProSport does not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

1. Editors' Responsibilities

Publication Decisions: Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals and must strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors’decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board’s reviews and paper’s importance.

Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that journals and sections within journals will have different aims and standards.

Fair Review: Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely.The editor ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission

2. Author’s Responsibilities

Reporting Standards: Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance to the author guidelines.

Originality: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original.

Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.

Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.

3. Reviewers Responsibilities

Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor, and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.

Conflict of Interest: All reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding bodies.

4. Change or Modification of Published Paper

Manuscript withdrawal is strongly discouraged, it is waste of valuable resources that publisher put. If author still requests withdrawal of their manuscript, following guidelines has to be followed

• Manuscript withdrawal will be permitted only for the most compelling and unavoidable reasons. It is unacceptable to withdraw a manuscript  from a journal because it is being accepted by another journal;
• Author should submitting a request to editorial office as a letter that signed by all authors stating the full cause that led to the step of manuscript withdrawal;
• In a case where a manuscript has taken more than six months time for review process, publishers allows the author to withdraw manuscript;
• If author don't agree, the author will be blacklisted for publication in this journal;
• Authors must not assume that their manuscript has been withdrawn until they have received appropriate notification to this effect from the editorial office.

5. Penalties

• Double Submission: If double submission was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as intentional thing,
  Review process will be terminated.
• The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors.