Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

SIGMA: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractice. The Editorial Board is responsible for preventing any violations of publication ethics. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and this journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. By submitting an article to this journal, authors affirm that the manuscript is original, has not been published previously in any language (in whole or in part), and is not currently under consideration elsewhere.

Editors, authors, and reviewers involved in SIGMA: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika are fully committed to upholding best practices in scholarly publishing and fulfilling their respective ethical responsibilities as defined by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of COPE's Core Practices, detailed guidelines can be accessed at: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Section A: Publication and Authorship

All submitted manuscripts are subject to a rigorous peer-review process by at least two qualified and anonymous reviewers (blind peer review). The review process considers relevance, scientific validity, contribution significance, originality, clarity, and language quality. Editorial decisions include: accept, accept with revisions, or reject. If revisions are requested, resubmission does not guarantee acceptance. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

This journal follows the authorship criteria set by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which states that authorship should be based on the following four criteria:
1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; and
2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
3. Final approval of the version to be published; and
4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring accuracy and integrity.

Authors must be able to identify which co-authors are responsible for specific parts of the work and have confidence in the integrity of their contributions. All individuals who meet the four criteria should be listed as authors. Those who do not meet all criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

The corresponding author is primarily responsible for communication with the journal throughout the submission, peer-review, and publication process and for ensuring that all journal administrative requirements (such as conflict of interest disclosures and ethical declarations) are properly completed.

Section B: Authors’ Responsibilities

1. Authors must declare that the manuscript is original work.
2. The manuscript has not been published elsewhere and is not under review by another journal.
3. Authors must participate in the peer-review process.
4. Authors are required to provide corrections, clarifications, or retractions when necessary.
5. All listed authors must have made significant contributions to the research.
6. Authors must confirm that all data presented are genuine and authentic.
7. Authors must disclose all sources of funding and any potential conflicts of interest.
8. Authors must report any errors discovered post-publication to the editorial team.

Section C: Reviewers’ Responsibilities

1. Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents.
2. Reviews must be conducted objectively and without personal criticism.
3. Reviewers must express their opinions clearly and provide supporting arguments.
4. Reviewers should identify relevant literature not cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers must report any significant similarity or plagiarism to the editor.
6. Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists.

Section D: Editors’ Responsibilities

1. Editors have full authority to accept or reject a manuscript.
2. Editors are responsible for the content and overall quality of the journal.
3. Editors must consider the needs of both authors and readers.
4. Editors are responsible for ensuring the integrity of the academic record.
5. Editors must issue corrections or retractions when necessary.
6. Editors must be transparent regarding funding sources.
7. Editorial decisions must be based on scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.
8. Editors must preserve reviewer anonymity and avoid any conflict of interest.
9. Editors must act on suspected ethical violations and not reject submissions based on mere suspicion without evidence.

Research Ethics

Research Involving Humans

Research involving human subjects, whether individuals, samples, or data, must comply with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Prior ethical approval must be obtained from an institutional review board (IRB) or appropriate ethics committee. A statement confirming this, including the name of the committee and approval number (if available), must be included in the manuscript.

For non-interventional studies (e.g., surveys), where ethical approval is not required due to legal exceptions or exemptions granted by an ethics committee, this must be clearly stated with appropriate justification. When in doubt, researchers are advised to consult their institution before proceeding.

Descriptions of groups by race, ethnicity, age, disease, disability, religion, sex, gender, or sexual orientation must be non-discriminatory and accompanied by clear definitions.

Consent for Minors and Vulnerable Participants

Written informed consent must be obtained from the parent or legal guardian of participants who are not legally competent to give consent. In cases where verbal consent is obtained, it must be explained and documented in the manuscript. Consent must be voluntary, with no coercion or inducement.

Retrospective Studies

Researchers must obtain ethical clearance and permission from data owners. If data are publicly available and freely reusable under open licenses, this must be stated clearly. Data must be anonymized unless written consent has been granted for disclosure.

Survey Studies

Researchers must inform participants of the study’s purpose, data confidentiality, and storage methods. Voluntary consent must be recorded, and relevant data protection regulations followed. Ethical approval must be obtained or exemption stated with rationale.

Covert Observational Research

In cases where participants cannot give prior informed consent, researchers must obtain ethical approval and justify the covert nature of the study. A post-study consent is recommended. Editors reserve the right to reject such submissions if deemed ethically inappropriate.

Research Involving Indigenous Communities

Researchers must adhere to specific ethical protocols and obtain necessary approvals from community leaders or elders. Cultural sensitivity and publication restrictions, especially concerning visual materials, must be observed.

Authors are encouraged to consult ethical guidelines such as the AIATSIS Guidelines for Ethical Research, National Inuit Strategy on Research, or On Screen Protocols & Pathways, especially when research involves indigenous communities or media documentation.