Research & Publication Misconduct

AAAR does not accept research or publication practices that intentionally or materially distort the scientific record. Manuscripts must communicate authentic research procedures, credible evidence, accurate analytical outcomes, and conclusions that can reasonably be supported by the reported work.

Unacceptable practices include plagiarism, unattributed appropriation of intellectual work, fabricated or falsified evidence, misleading alteration of data or analytical results, undisclosed duplicate publication, concurrent submission to multiple journals, inappropriate text recycling, manipulation of citations, fabricated references, fraudulent reviewer identities, peer-review interference, and unauthorized changes to authorship.

False statements concerning ethics approval, informed consent, institutional authorization, research permissions, data availability, funding, conflicts of interest, or research procedures are also unacceptable. Authors must not present invented analyses, fabricated statistical outputs, fictitious interviews, nonexistent datasets, or unverified automated outputs as genuine scientific findings.

Where a credible concern arises, the Editorial Office may request clarification, relevant research records, supporting documentation, or an independent scholarly assessment. The nature of the response depends on the available evidence, the seriousness of the concern, the manuscript's publication stage, and the need for procedural fairness.

Authorship & Contributorship

Authorship must represent substantial intellectual involvement in the reported research or literature review. Authors are expected to participate meaningfully in developing the research, collecting or interpreting evidence, preparing or critically revising the manuscript, approving its final version, and accepting responsibility for the integrity of their scholarly contributions.

Individuals who provide administrative assistance, financial support, technical services, routine supervision, language assistance, or other contributions that do not satisfy authorship requirements should be recognized through appropriate acknowledgements rather than being assigned authorship without justification. Ghost, guest, and gift authorship are prohibited.

CRediT Contributions: AAAR requires accurate contributor-role information using the CRediT Contributor Roles Taxonomy. Contributions are documented in the separate Title Page & Author Information Form and must reflect actual work performed by the identified authors.

A corresponding author must be identified and must provide a valid ORCID iD. Other authors should supply ORCID identifiers where available. The corresponding author coordinates submission information, author approvals, required declarations, journal correspondence, and communication of manuscript decisions to co-authors.

Title Page & Author Confirmation: Author names, affiliations, contribution statements, approval confirmations, originality declarations, funding information, conflicts of interest, and other relevant publication declarations are recorded in the separate Title Page. A separate author-declaration letter is not ordinarily required unless requested for a specific editorial or research-integrity purpose.

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors must include a reasoned explanation and confirmation from the affected authors. The responsible editor evaluates the request in relation to the available evidence, the contribution record, authorship accountability, and the stage of manuscript processing.

After publication, a material correction to authorship must be addressed through an appropriate, transparent scholarly-record procedure. Author changes must not be made secretly or used to conceal earlier authorship disputes or editorial decisions.

Manuscript Types & Peer Review Policy

AAAR accepts exactly two manuscript types: Research Paper and Literature Review Paper. Quantitative, qualitative, mixed-method, conceptual, methodological, econometric, case-based, and other research approaches describe the design or intellectual contribution of an eligible manuscript; they do not constitute additional manuscript categories.

A Research Paper presents original research undertaken through a defensible and adequately documented design. A Literature Review Paper provides meaningful synthesis of scholarly literature through a clearly identified and sufficiently transparent review approach. Both manuscript types must demonstrate intellectual merit, credible evidence, logical argumentation, and a substantive contribution within the journal's Aims & Scope.

AAAR applies double-anonymous peer review. Authors submit a Blinded Manuscript separately from the Title Page & Author Information Form. Identifying author information is withheld from independent reviewers, while reviewer identities remain confidential to authors under the applicable editorial workflow.

Every new submission undergoes initial editorial screening. Screening considers journal scope, manuscript-type eligibility, originality, methodological adequacy, research integrity, scholarly contribution, presentation quality, and submission compliance. The journal may decline a manuscript before external review when it does not satisfy essential editorial requirements.

Manuscripts proceeding to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers whose scholarly expertise is relevant to the research topic, conceptual framework, methodological approach, or review methodology.

Research Paper Assessment: Reviewers consider the research question, theoretical or conceptual foundation, research design, sampling and data selection, instruments, evidence quality, analytical validity, findings, interpretation, limitations, and theoretical or practical implications. Expectations are applied according to the actual methodology rather than a single preferred statistical technique.

Literature Review Paper Assessment: Reviewers consider the review objective, stated review design, identification and selection of literature, transparency of relevant procedures, critical evaluation, synthesis, conceptual development, scholarly integration, limitations, and the extent to which conclusions are supported by the reviewed literature.

An article must not claim to follow a systematic, scoping, PRISMA-based, bibliometric, meta-analytical, or other specialized review method unless that method was actually undertaken and sufficiently reported. Descriptive bibliometric output alone does not establish a substantive literature-review contribution without meaningful scholarly interpretation.

Editorial Workflow: Submission → Editorial Screening → Independent Peer Review → Revision → Post-Revision Verification → Final Editorial Decision.

Reviewer recommendations may include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection. Such recommendations inform editorial judgment but do not automatically determine the final decision. Where reports materially disagree, the responsible academic editor may seek clarification or arrange an additional independent review.

Reviewer Confidentiality: Reviewers must disclose relevant conflicts, maintain manuscript confidentiality, provide objective and constructive reports, and avoid unauthorized communication with authors. Manuscript files and unpublished findings must not be disclosed, commercially exploited, or delegated to another reviewer without editorial authorization.

Originality, Plagiarism & Reference Integrity

Authors must submit original scholarly material that has not been published previously in substantially the same form or simultaneously offered for publication to another journal. All borrowed concepts, quotations, methods, data, illustrations, tables, instruments, and other intellectual materials must receive appropriate attribution.

Similarity Screening: AAAR applies a maximum overall similarity threshold of 15% under its harmonized editorial screening standard. Appropriate similarity-detection software may be used to examine submitted manuscripts for potentially problematic textual overlap.

A similarity score is not, by itself, a conclusive plagiarism finding. Editorial evaluation must consider the origin, extent, nature, placement, quotation status, and context of matching passages. A manuscript may contain unacceptable plagiarism even when the numerical similarity score falls below the stated threshold.

Authors must distinguish legitimate reuse of previously published knowledge from undisclosed reproduction of their own or another person's work. Material duplication, inappropriate text recycling, redundant publication, and misleadingly repackaged findings may result in requests for clarification, revision, rejection, or relevant post-publication measures.

Reference Integrity: AAAR requires APA 7th edition for citations and references. Authors must verify that cited publications exist, bibliographic information is accurate, DOI identifiers correspond to the cited works, and in-text citations match the reference list. Fictitious, hallucinated, fabricated, or unverifiable sources must not be presented as legitimate scholarly references.

Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when financial, professional, institutional, collaborative, supervisory, academic, competitive, or personal circumstances may influence, or reasonably appear to influence, impartial scholarly judgment. Relevant conflicts must be disclosed and managed rather than concealed.

Authors: Authors must disclose relevant financial and non-financial interests, including relationships with funding organizations, institutions, research sponsors, or other parties with an interest in the reported work. Where no material conflict exists, an explicit statement to that effect must be provided in the separate Title Page.

Reviewers: Reviewers must promptly identify relationships or circumstances that could compromise independent evaluation. Where a material conflict cannot be adequately managed, the reviewer must decline or withdraw from the assignment.

Editors: Editors must not oversee a manuscript when their involvement creates a material conflict of interest. In such cases, the manuscript should be assigned to a suitably qualified academic editor who is able to manage the review and decision process independently.

Editor-Authored Manuscripts: Editors submitting their own scholarly work must not manage reviewer selection, access confidential assessment information, evaluate their own revisions, or participate in the final editorial decision. Editorial-board membership does not provide preferential treatment or guarantee acceptance.

Generative AI & Automated Tools

Generative AI systems and automated applications cannot be credited as authors because they cannot provide informed approval, assume legal or ethical responsibility, or be held accountable for published scholarly work. Human authors remain responsible for all manuscript content and research conclusions.

Disclosure: Substantive AI-assisted activities beyond ordinary spelling, grammar, formatting, or straightforward language correction must be disclosed through the separate Title Page & Author Information Form. The disclosure should describe the relevant system and the purpose for which it was used.

When artificial intelligence, machine learning, automated classification, large language models, or related computational technologies constitute part of the research methodology, data analysis, or literature-review process, the methodological procedures must be reported with sufficient clarity for independent academic evaluation.

AI-assisted numerical results, accounting interpretations, financial calculations, references, quotations, literature classifications, and factual assertions must be independently checked. Automated outputs must not be portrayed as verified empirical results unless supported by appropriate underlying evidence and valid procedures.

Images & Research Evidence: AI-generated or materially altered graphics must not be presented deceptively as original empirical, documentary, observational, or photographic evidence. Appropriate explanatory illustrations may be considered when their nature and use are accurately disclosed.

Editorial Confidentiality: Reviewers and editors must not expose unpublished manuscripts, identifiable author records, confidential reviewer reports, restricted datasets, or private editorial communication to external AI services when suitable confidentiality and information-protection safeguards cannot be assured. Automated assistance does not replace human editorial responsibility.

Research Ethics, Consent & Permissions

Applied accounting research may involve employees, accountants, auditors, financial managers, public officials, organizational respondents, confidential corporate records, commercially sensitive financial information, or identifiable research participants. Authors must comply with applicable institutional, disciplinary, ethical, legal, and data-protection requirements.

Where applicable, ethical approval, informed consent, institutional permission, organizational authorization, restricted-data access, and related compliance information must be accurately documented in the separate Title Page. Authors may be asked to provide appropriate verification of these declarations.

During double-anonymous review, manuscripts should explain the relevant ethical safeguards and research procedures without unnecessarily revealing author identities, participating organizations, or confidential information. Sufficient methodological transparency must be maintained for reviewers to assess ethical and scholarly adequacy.

Research involving identifiable individuals requires appropriate attention to privacy, informed participation, secure information handling, and consent for publication where relevant. Particular care is required where participants or organizations may face reputational, professional, financial, or other foreseeable risks arising from disclosure.

Ethical Accuracy: Approval numbers, consent statements, institutional permissions, and research-authorization records must not be fabricated. When formal ethics approval is not required under the applicable framework, authors must accurately explain that position if clarification is requested.

Data, Transparency & Reproducibility

AAAR encourages research reporting that enables readers and reviewers to understand how conclusions were developed from the relevant evidence. Authors should document research questions, theoretical foundations, data sources, selection procedures, analytical methods, assumptions, and material limitations with appropriate methodological detail.

Accounting research based on surveys, interviews, financial statements, organizational records, public databases, experiments, case studies, archival materials, or other evidence must describe the relevant collection, selection, processing, and analytical procedures sufficiently for meaningful scholarly assessment.

Authors should retain applicable data, research instruments, analytical documentation, coding records, computational materials, review-search records, and other supporting evidence needed to address legitimate questions about the reported work. Where reasonable and permitted, suitable supporting materials are encouraged to be deposited in recognized research repositories.

Restrictions arising from participant confidentiality, private company records, financial secrecy, contractual obligations, proprietary accounting data, intellectual property, or legal requirements must be respected. The journal does not require public disclosure of protected information where such disclosure would be unethical or unlawful.

Data Availability Statement: Authors must provide an accurate declaration in the separate Title Page identifying whether supporting data or materials are publicly accessible, available on reasonable request, included in supporting files, restricted for legitimate reasons, or not applicable to the reported study. The declaration must correspond to the actual status of the evidence.

Funding & Acknowledgements

Authors must accurately identify grants, institutional support, research sponsorships, financial assistance, or other material funding arrangements relevant to the reported work. Funding information should include appropriate institutional or grant identifiers where applicable and must not imply support that was not actually provided.

Individuals and institutions that supplied meaningful assistance without meeting authorship requirements may be acknowledged appropriately. Such recognition must fairly represent the contribution and respect applicable consent and confidentiality requirements.

Funding and acknowledgment information that reveals author identities must be placed in the separate Title Page during double-anonymous review. Appropriate information may be transferred to the public article record after acceptance through authorized editorial and production procedures.

Third-Party Materials & Permissions

Authors are responsible for determining whether research instruments, questionnaires, accounting datasets, proprietary databases, financial reports, figures, tables, measurement scales, copyrighted extracts, software outputs, or other external materials require permission, acknowledgment, or compliance with particular licensing terms.

Where authorization is necessary, it must be obtained before publication. Appropriate source acknowledgment, licensing information, and permission documentation must be provided through the relevant manuscript or administrative materials.

The publication license applied to an AAAR article does not automatically remove copyright or contractual restrictions from third-party materials expressly excluded from that license. Authors must make such limitations clear where appropriate and supply reasonable supporting documentation if requested.

Complaints & Appeals

AAAR receives legitimate concerns relating to manuscript evaluation, reviewer conduct, editorial procedures, conflicts of interest, publication ethics, administrative handling, confidentiality, research integrity, and the accuracy of published scholarly content. Complaints and appeals are assessed in a professional manner with due regard for evidence, fairness, and confidentiality.

An editorial appeal should identify the relevant manuscript, the disputed decision, the grounds for requesting reconsideration, and any material information supporting the request. An apparent procedural irregularity, significant factual error, overlooked evidence, or unmanaged conflict of interest may warrant additional editorial examination.

An author's disagreement with an unfavorable assessment does not, by itself, establish grounds for reversing a decision. Any reconsideration must take account of the complete manuscript record and remain under authorized independent academic editorial judgment.

Ethics, Complaints & Appeals Contact: The Managing Editor coordinates relevant correspondence through advancesresearch@gmail.com. Matters requiring principal academic editorial authority are referred to the Editor-in-Chief or another appropriately authorized independent editor.

Handling Allegations of Research Misconduct

AAAR considers credible allegations of research or publication misconduct through an evidence-based and proportionate process. The submission of a complaint does not constitute proof that the alleged conduct occurred, and the journal seeks to distinguish substantiated findings from unresolved concerns.

Receipt & Preliminary Assessment: The Editorial Office records the concern, reviews the available supporting information, and considers whether it falls within the journal's responsibility. Further examination is initiated when the circumstances justify an appropriate response.

Conflict-of-Interest Management: Editors or other individuals involved in handling an allegation must disclose relevant conflicts. Where impartiality may reasonably be compromised, responsibility is transferred to an appropriate independent person or editorial authority.

Evidence & Clarification: Relevant parties may be invited to explain the matter and provide supporting records, source data, permissions, research documentation, approval information, correspondence, or other material necessary for a fair assessment.

Independent Consultation: The journal may obtain suitable advice from independent scholars, research-integrity specialists, ethics committees, relevant institutions, publishers, funders, or other competent bodies when the nature of the allegation requires additional expertise.

Editorial Determination: The resulting action depends on the evidence and publication stage. Possible outcomes include no further action, clarification, additional verification, manuscript revision, rejection, a published correction, an Expression of Concern, retraction, or another proportionate scholarly-record measure.

Procedural Fairness: Confidentiality, relevant rights of affected individuals, reasonable opportunities to respond, accurate documentation, and the independence of editorial judgment should be protected throughout the handling of a misconduct concern.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern & Retractions

AAAR maintains the accuracy and traceability of its formally published research. When credible concerns arise after publication, the journal considers the most appropriate mechanism for correcting or qualifying the scholarly record without concealing relevant publication history.

Correction: A formal correction may be appropriate when a published article contains a material error that requires public clarification but does not fundamentally undermine the reliability of the research. The notice should identify the affected article and explain the relevant change.

Expression of Concern: An Expression of Concern may be appropriate where serious questions exist about a publication but the relevant findings remain uncertain, incomplete, or under investigation. The notice should not imply a completed finding where the evidence is still unresolved.

Retraction: Retraction may be necessary where published findings are substantially unreliable, serious misconduct is established, unethical research materially compromises the publication, or significant duplicate publication or another major integrity problem invalidates the article's reliability.

Version of Record: Substantive changes to a published article must be handled transparently. Formal notices should be linked to the affected article and, where applicable, reflected in DOI metadata, indexing information, and the permanent scholarly record. Silent replacement must not be used to conceal material corrections or integrity concerns.

Manuscript Withdrawal: Authors may submit a formal withdrawal request before publication while their manuscript remains under consideration. They should obtain confirmation from AAAR that the manuscript is no longer under consideration before submitting it to another journal. No separate withdrawal fee is charged.

Applicable post-publication decisions may take account of relevant COPE guidance, the documented evidence, the rights of affected parties, and the overriding need to protect the reliability of scholarly publication.

Open Access, Copyright & Licensing

AAAR provides immediate Open Access to formally published scholarly articles. Readers may access the published research without subscription charges or a mandatory reader-registration requirement. The journal supports broad scholarly access, responsible knowledge sharing, and transparent dissemination of applied accounting research.

Copyright: Authors retain copyright in their scholarly work and grant AAAR the right of first publication and the permissions necessary for authorized publication, distribution, scholarly identification, and preservation.

Licensing: Under the harmonized AAAR publication standard, newly published articles are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0). The license permits copying, redistribution, adaptation, transformation, and reuse, including commercial reuse, when appropriate attribution is provided, relevant changes are identified, and adaptations comply with the ShareAlike requirement.

Submitted Manuscript: Authors may share or deposit a submitted version through appropriate academic channels, provided that its status as an unpublished manuscript is accurately represented and applicable intellectual-property, confidentiality, and third-party requirements are respected.

Accepted Manuscript: After formal scientific-editorial acceptance, authors may deposit the accepted version, clearly identifying it as distinct from the final publication. It must not be presented as the authoritative published Version of Record.

Published Version of Record: Following publication, authors may deposit or distribute their articles in accordance with the license applicable to that article. The deposited record should identify AAAR as the original journal and provide accurate citation information, DOI, and licensing details.

Self-Archiving: AAAR does not impose a journal-specific embargo on permitted deposits of submitted, accepted, or published manuscript versions. Authors remain responsible for any applicable legal, ethical, contractual, repository, confidentiality, or third-party obligations.

Historical Licensing Integrity: Articles published under an earlier license retain their documented licensing terms. Adoption of the harmonized licensing framework does not retroactively replace the original license information attached to a previously published Version of Record.

Advertising, Revenue & Editorial Independence

AAAR separates scholarly decision-making from financial and promotional interests. APC administration, publisher funding, institutional collaboration, and any applicable advertising or sponsorship arrangements must not determine whether a manuscript receives favorable editorial consideration.

No advertiser, sponsor, institutional partner, commercial service provider, or administrative representative has authority to determine reviewer assignments, influence reviewer recommendations, purchase manuscript acceptance, override independent editorial assessment, or guarantee publication.

Any promotional activity undertaken by the journal must remain distinguishable from editorial content. The journal does not imply that academic acceptance, research quality, publication outcomes, or scholarly endorsement can be purchased through financial or institutional relationships.

Post-Publication Discussion

AAAR encourages responsible academic debate concerning published research. Constructive methodological criticism, alternative interpretations, evidence-based commentary, and identification of material errors contribute to the refinement of applied accounting scholarship.

Readers, researchers, authors, reviewers, and interested stakeholders may raise concerns concerning analytical reliability, accounting interpretation, research ethics, factual accuracy, undisclosed limitations, bibliographic information, or other matters warranting editorial consideration.

Where appropriate, the journal may request clarification from the authors, examine supporting documentation, consult independent experts, or initiate a proportionate editorial review. Any necessary published response should preserve the distinction between scholarly disagreement, correctable error, unresolved concern, and substantiated research misconduct.

APC & Post-Acceptance Governance

AAAR does not require Article Processing Charge payment at submission, editorial screening, peer review, revision, post-revision verification, or any other stage preceding final scientific-editorial acceptance. APC and waiver administration are initiated only after an authorized final acceptance decision.

Standard APC — IDR 100,000: An accepted manuscript is subject to the standard APC where at least one author has an institutional affiliation with an institution located in Indonesia.

Full APC Waiver — IDR 0: An accepted manuscript receives a full waiver where every author is affiliated exclusively with institutions outside Indonesia. Eligibility is based on institutional affiliation and not nationality, citizenship, birthplace, or personal residence.

AAAR does not impose a mandatory manuscript-submission fee, peer-review fee, page charge, separate withdrawal fee, or mandatory purchase of external editing or publication services. The applicable APC is administered according to the journal's official post-acceptance procedures.

Official Invoicing: When an APC applies, an official invoice is issued only after final editorial acceptance. Authors should use authorized payment instructions and verify any unusual invoice or payment request through the official journal communication channels. Previously issued legitimate invoices and agreed payment terms are not changed retroactively.

Post-Acceptance Workflow: Final Editorial Acceptance → APC or Waiver Verification → Post-Acceptance Administration → Copyediting → Proofreading & Production → Metadata Verification → Version of Record → Online Publication.

Production and publication preparation take place after the manuscript has satisfied the relevant scientific-editorial requirements. A post-acceptance administrator or production service cannot independently revise the scholarly findings, override authorship decisions, or resolve substantive research-integrity concerns without appropriate academic editorial authority.

Withdrawal and refund requests are handled under the official AAAR APC Policy. After payment and the commencement of substantive post-acceptance services, the APC is normally non-refundable, subject to consideration of documented payment errors or relevant journal-attributable administrative circumstances.

Financial Independence: Payment or waiver status does not determine acceptance, reviewer recommendations, publication dates, issue assignment, DOI registration, research evaluation, or scholarly outcomes. No payment constitutes a guarantee of publication.

Policy Application, Historical Record & Contact

AAAR applies its current editorial and publication policies according to their relevant requirements and applicable administrative arrangements. New or revised provisions are interpreted prospectively where appropriate and do not automatically invalidate legitimate earlier editorial decisions, publication records, financial arrangements, or scholarly commitments.

Aims & Scope: Manuscripts are evaluated in relation to the journal's applicable Aims & Scope, including financial and managerial accounting, accounting standards, public-sector accounting, financial reporting, organizational governance, sustainability and ESG accounting, accounting information systems, green finance, and related fields recognized by AAAR. Scholarly relevance is determined by the substance of the contribution.

Publication Frequency: AAAR maintains one annual volume comprising three regular numbered issues. For the historical publication framework associated with Volumes 1–4 (2023–2026), the designated periods are No. 1 October–January, No. 2 February–May, and No. 3 June–September, subject to the actual publication records documented in the journal archives.

Standardized Issue Schedule: Beginning with Volume 5 (2027), the regular publication periods are No. 1 January–April, No. 2 May–August, and No. 3 September–December. October–December 2026 constitutes the scheduled transition without creation of an additional fourth numbered issue.

Continuous Publication: AAAR adopts continuous publication prospectively from 1 September 2026 within the applicable active numbered issue and subject to the established transition. This arrangement concerns the timing of individual article release and does not reduce the required peer-review, editorial, research-integrity, or publication-production standards.

Historical Scholarly Record: Established annual volumes, published numbered issues, article titles, authorship information, actual publication dates, pagination, DOI registrations, original licensing information, and other valid bibliographic records remain part of the permanent scholarly record. Later policy revisions must not be used to retrospectively alter these records without a legitimate, transparent correction procedure.

Publication Ethics & Administrative Support: Muslim Muslim, Managing Editor, coordinates relevant administrative correspondence concerning journal procedures, complaints, appeals, research-integrity documentation, and publication-ethics matters. Official email: advancesresearch@gmail.com.

Principal Academic Editorial Contact: Suham Cahyono, Editor-in-Chief, provides senior academic editorial leadership and oversight of independent scholarly evaluation, research integrity, and decisions requiring principal editorial authority. Official academic editorial correspondence may be directed to editor@advancesinresearch.id.

Commitment to Responsible Scholarly Publishing

AAAR is committed to publishing rigorous and responsibly conducted applied accounting research through transparent editorial procedures, independent peer review, appropriate research-ethics safeguards, accurate scholarly reporting, and respect for authors, reviewers, institutions, research participants, and readers.

The journal seeks to advance reliable academic knowledge while maintaining meaningful editorial independence, responsible authorship, accurate citations and evidence, appropriate confidentiality, accessible publication, fair handling of complaints, transparent correction procedures, and the long-term integrity of the scholarly record.