1. The validity and seriousness of the allegation will first be assessed.
2. Any potential conflict of interest involving individuals making or investigating the allegation will be considered.
3. The corresponding author may be contacted and requested to provide a detailed explanation on behalf of all authors.
4. Additional documentation, data, expert assessment, or institutional clarification may be requested where necessary.
5. An editorial decision will be made based on the evidence and recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing.

Manuscripts submitted to Silatene: Jurnal Sosial & Humaniora may be screened using similarity-detection software such as Turnitin or other appropriate tools. Similarity reports are evaluated editorially and are not interpreted solely on the basis of a numerical percentage.

Editors hold a central responsibility for protecting the quality, integrity, independence, and fairness of the journal's editorial process and for making appropriate decisions on submitted manuscripts.

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on their scholarly merit, relevance, originality, and methodological quality without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, institutional affiliation, religion, political philosophy, academic status, or other characteristics unrelated to academic quality.

Editors and editorial staff must protect information concerning submitted manuscripts and disclose it only to individuals directly involved in the editorial process, including authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher where appropriate.

Editors must disclose circumstances that could compromise their impartiality. Unpublished information or ideas contained in submitted manuscripts must not be used for personal research or advantage without appropriate permission.

Editors should safeguard the transparency and accuracy of the scholarly record and should facilitate appropriate corrections, clarifications, expressions of concern, retractions, or other editorial notices where necessary.

Editors should respond promptly and appropriately to credible concerns regarding research misconduct, unethical publication practices, manipulation of peer review, or other serious threats to the integrity of the journal.

Peer review assists editors in making informed editorial decisions and may also help authors improve the quality, clarity, rigor, and scholarly contribution of their manuscripts.

A reviewer who considers themselves insufficiently qualified to evaluate a manuscript or is unable to complete the review within the requested period should promptly inform the Editor and decline the assignment.

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, reproduce, distribute, discuss, or disclose manuscript content except where specifically authorized by the Editor.

Reviewers must protect the confidentiality of manuscripts when using digital or AI-assisted technologies. Confidential manuscript content should not be uploaded to publicly accessible generative AI systems where confidentiality, data security, or intellectual property cannot be adequately protected.

Reviewers should recommend additional citations only when they are genuinely relevant to the manuscript. Reviewers must not request citations solely to increase citations to their own work, their colleagues, their institution, or particular journals.

Reviews should be objective, constructive, critical, evidence-based, respectful, and free from personal criticism. Reviewer comments should clearly explain major concerns and provide appropriate scholarly reasoning.

Reviewers should identify important scholarly work that may have been overlooked and should confidentially inform the Editor if they identify substantial overlap, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other potential ethical concerns.

Reviewers should decline manuscripts where competitive, collaborative, financial, institutional, personal, or other relationships could reasonably compromise their impartiality. Privileged information obtained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage.

Authors should present an accurate, complete, and objective account of the research performed and its significance. Research data and findings must not be fabricated, falsified, manipulated, or intentionally misrepresented.

Authors should retain relevant research data for a reasonable period and, where appropriate and ethically permissible, should be prepared to provide supporting data for editorial verification or scholarly examination.

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work. Where the work, ideas, words, data, or other materials of others are used, they must be properly acknowledged and cited.

Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal. Publishing substantially the same research in multiple primary publications without appropriate disclosure and justification constitutes unethical publishing behavior.

Authors must appropriately acknowledge scholarly sources that have influenced the research, conceptual framework, methodology, interpretation, or argument of the manuscript.

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant scholarly contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the study. Individuals who have made substantial contributions should be appropriately acknowledged as authors or contributors.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included, that inappropriate authorship is avoided, and that all authors approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission.

Research involving human participants, animals, hazardous materials, sensitive procedures, or other ethically significant activities must comply with relevant ethical and legal requirements. Authors should clearly identify such matters in the manuscript where applicable.

Authors should disclose financial, institutional, professional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the research or interpretation of the manuscript. Relevant sources of research funding should also be disclosed.

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they should promptly notify the journal and cooperate with the Editor in issuing a correction, retraction, or other appropriate editorial action.

Authors wishing to reproduce copyrighted figures, tables, photographs, text passages, or other protected material are responsible for obtaining appropriate permission where required and providing evidence of permission upon request.

Authors must comply with ethical standards applicable to their research. Where required, ethical approval, informed consent, institutional authorization, or other appropriate clearance should be obtained and reported.

Research involving confidential, personal, proprietary, organizational, or commercially sensitive information must include appropriate measures to protect privacy, confidentiality, and data security.

The publisher supports the editorial and scholarly communication process and shares responsibility for protecting the reliability, continuity, accessibility, and integrity of the journal's published record.

The publisher should provide appropriate policies, systems, procedures, and technical support that enable editors, reviewers, and authors to fulfil their ethical responsibilities.

Commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, publication charges, institutional interests, or other sources of revenue must not determine or improperly influence editorial decisions.

The publisher should support the continued availability, accessibility, preservation, and integrity of published scholarly content through appropriate journal systems, repositories, archives, or preservation arrangements.

The publisher should assist editors with appropriate technical, procedural, ethical, and administrative support and facilitate communication with institutions, journals, publishers, or other relevant parties when necessary to address publication ethics concerns.

• requesting clarification from the authors;
• requesting supporting data or documentation;
• consulting reviewers or independent experts;
• contacting the author's institution where appropriate;
• rejecting the manuscript;
• publishing an erratum or correction;
• publishing an expression of concern;
• retracting a published article in serious cases.

• Correction / Erratum: for significant but correctable errors that do not invalidate the main findings.
• Expression of Concern: where substantial concerns exist but the available evidence is not yet sufficient for a final conclusion.
• Retraction: where findings are unreliable because of serious error, misconduct, plagiarism, unethical research, duplicate publication, or another substantial violation of publishing ethics.