Journal Statement/Publication Ethics/Malpractice Statement

The SAECJ's publication ethics statement used references from the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011) and position statements for editors and authors that were developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity in Singapore in 2010 (Wager & Kleinert, 2011;  Kleinert & Wager, 2011)  where the submission of a paper implies that:
-The work described has not been published elsewhere except in the form of an abstract/as part of a published     lecture/academic thesis.
-The work is not under consideration for any publication elsewhere.
-The work's submission and publication in the journal is known and approved by all authors.
-The submitted paper should be the author’s own work and there are no falsification or fabrication of presented data, plagiarism including duplicate publication of the authors’ own work without proper citation and misappropriation of.
-Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated seriously and will be panalised by Penerbit, UPSI.

SAECJ using Turnitin to screen plagiarism. For the articles that have less than 20% similarity, the article will be accepted for the reviewing process. As for the articles that have 21%-40% similarity will also be accepted but only after improvement have been made before the reviewing process. For the article that have a 40% and above similarity will be recommended for rejection. After the article have been reviewed by the appointed reviewer, the article will then undergo again a process using the Turnitin software to check for plagiarism especially articles that require major revision.

SAECJ is double blind peer reviewed. The editorial processes follow standard procedures thus:
-Call for SAECJ's submissions/online submissions.
-Article submissions and acknowledgements by the SAECJ's Editorial Board.
-Initial evaluation by the Chief and Editor.
-Allocation of reviewers based on article content decided by the Editor.
-Reviewing process for the maximum duration of one month.
-Author re-submissions if necessary based on reviewers's comment and suggestion.
-Further editing and processing.
-Evaluation for SAECJ publication.


Open Access Policy

UPSI Press publishes fully open access journals. All articles can be read, shared and downloaded without any charges applied. However, in accordance to publication ethics and best practices of scholarly publishing, authors and SAECJ must be credited.


Publication Charges

This journal do not charge Submission Charges or Article Processing Charges.


Language Policy

The journal accepts manuscripts written in English or Malay.


Responsibility of Authors
-Author(s) are expected to submit manuscript that shows high novelty and originality.
-Authors(s) are responsible for any plagiarism misconduct.
-Authors(s) are expected to cite all references mentioned in the manuscript.
-Author(s) should follow SAECJ’s writing format. Please refer SAECJ Guideline for Authors.
Authors(s) should prepare manuscript with good English. Non-English native author(s) are advised to seek assistance from English Editing Service (proofread).
-Author(s) should obtain permission for use of copyrighted materials from other sources such as journal, book, magazine and internet.
-Author(s) should ensure that the manuscript is not submitted and published, or under consideration for publication elsewhere.
-Author(s) should obtain ethical approval from Ethics Committee for any human and animal subject used.
-It is the author's responsibility to ensure that all software used for the publication is original and licensed. Any use of illegal software will result in the paper being revoked.
-Author(s) should disclose any potential Conflict of Interest.
-Name and affiliation of author(s) should be clearly mentioned in the manuscript.
-Author(s) are advised to provide research financial support details (name of sponsor and research grant code), if applicable.


Responsibility of Editors

Decision on publication

The decision to publish articles submitted to the journal is under the purview of the editor. Evaluation of manuscript disregards author's gender, race, ethnic origin, citizenship or religious belief. Decisions are based on the journal's scope, relevance, originality and clarity.


The editor, editorial board members and any editorial staff ensure confidentiality of information submitted, except to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers and publisher.


Submitted papers that are rejected and unpublished are not to be used by the editor for any other purposes without explicit written permission from the author(s).


Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
-Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. SAECJ shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
-Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
-Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
-Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
-Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. 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.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
-Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.


Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from

Wager E., & Kleinert S. (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50 in: Mayer T. & Steneck N. (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7).

Kleinert S., & Wager E. (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 51 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 317-28). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7).