Record and Library Journal is a double-blind, peer-reviewed electronic journal. This letter explains the ethical rules of conduct established by all parties involved in the publication of articles in this journal, including the authors, the editor-in-chief, the editorial board, the peer-reviewer as well as the publisher, in this case, Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara.

The following ethical rules were composed regarding COPE's ethical editing, COPE's Ethical Guide for Peer Reviewers, COPE's Ethical Guide on Misconduct, & Best Practice Guideline.

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Record and Library Journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method.

It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Universitas Islam Sumatera Utara as the publisher of Record and Library Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

The editor of Record and Library Journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.

The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

1. Editorial Independence: Editors should maintain independence, avoiding conflicts of interest and personal/institutional bias.
2. Peer Review Process: Ensure a fair, transparent, timely peer review process with unbiased reviewer selection.
3. Confidentiality: Respect confidentiality of all manuscripts; information is restricted to authorized parties only.
4. Ethical Responsibilities: Vigilance against plagiarism and data manipulation; prompt action on ethical concerns.
5. Disclosure & Conflicts of Interest: Recuse from handling manuscripts with potential personal/financial conflicts.
6. Transparency: Keep journal policies and ethical requirements clearly accessible.

(Based on COPE's Ethical Guide for Peer Reviewers)

• Confidentiality: Keep the review process strictly confidential.
• Objectivity: Provide objective, balanced evaluations of manuscript quality.
• Conflict of Interest: Declare any bias or conflicting interest immediately.
• Timeliness: Complete reviews within agreed deadlines or notify editors promptly.
• Constructive Feedback: Offer respectful and actionable suggestions for manuscript improvement.

(Based on COPE's Ethical Guide on Misconduct)

• Plagiarism & Fabrication: Strict policies to detect and fairly investigate misconduct.
• Authorship Issues: Confirm substantial contribution from all listed authors.
• Conflict Resolution: Establish clear mechanisms for resolving ethical disputes.
• Retractions & Corrections: Promptly publish retractions or errata when misconduct or major errors occur.

☑ AI tools MAY ONLY be used for:

• Improving language, grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
• Formatting manuscript according to template structure.
• Technical paraphrasing with human review to prevent plagiarism.
• Summarizing original human-written content.
• Minor image adjustments (brightness, contrast) without data distortion.

☒ AI tools MUST NOT be used for:

• Generating original research hypotheses or drafting results/conclusions.
• Interpreting data or suggesting scientific findings.
• Generating references or AI-derived citations.
• Fabricating or manipulating images, graphs, or data.