Publication Ethics

Commitment to COPE Core Practices

The journal’s dedication to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics is grounded in the principles and guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). By systematically integrating COPE’s core practices into its editorial framework, the journal ensures that fairness, transparency, and accountability guide all aspects of its operations. Key elements of this commitment include:

• Policy Alignment and Governance:
  The journal’s editorial policies and procedures are regularly reviewed and updated to align with COPE’s recommendations, including its Core Practices. This involves ongoing consultation with COPE’s published guidelines and case studies to inform decision-making and policy refinements.

• Editorial and Reviewer Training:
  Editors, editorial board members, and reviewers receive continuous professional development opportunities—such as workshops, webinars, and reference materials provided by COPE. This training empowers stakeholders to identify potential ethical issues early and to address them with confidence and consistency.

• Clear Communication to Stakeholders:
  Authors, reviewers, and readers are informed of the journal’s adherence to COPE’s standards through publicly available policy statements and transparent editorial guidelines. Links to relevant COPE documents, such as the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, are provided to ensure clarity and understanding.

• Proactive Ethical Culture:
  Beyond policy enforcement, the journal promotes a culture in which ethical considerations are integral to the research and publication process. This proactive stance encourages early disclosure of conflicts of interest, responsible authorship practices, and prompt reporting of ethical concerns.

• Continuous Improvement and Responsiveness:
  Recognizing that ethical standards evolve, the journal remains open to updates in COPE’s guidance and emerging best practices. Feedback from authors, reviewers, and readers is actively solicited and carefully considered, ensuring that editorial policies remain dynamic, forward-looking, and in step with the scholarly community’s expectations.

By embedding COPE’s core practices into every facet of its operation, the journal not only upholds the integrity and credibility of the scholarly record but also fosters an environment where ethical research and publication flourish.

Ethical Oversight

The journal maintains a comprehensive and proactive system of ethical oversight designed to preserve the integrity, rigor, and credibility of its scholarly output. Through systematic evaluation and continual refinement, the journal ensures that editorial processes and published content consistently meet the highest ethical standards. Key aspects of this oversight include:

• Regular Policy Audits and Reviews:
  Editorial policies, peer review protocols, and publication workflows undergo periodic audits to verify their alignment with recognized ethical guidelines, including those provided by COPE and other industry bodies like ICMJE.

• Internal and External Expertise:
  The journal’s internal oversight is complemented by consultation with external advisors, institutional review boards, and recognized ethics committees. By incorporating a breadth of expertise, the journal ensures that oversight mechanisms are informed, balanced, and responsive to disciplinary nuances.

• Stakeholder Engagement and Feedback:
  Authors, reviewers, and readers are invited to provide input on the journal’s ethical frameworks. Their perspectives help the editorial team recognize areas needing improvement and adapt oversight measures to the evolving expectations of the scholarly community.

• Documentation and Transparency:
  All oversight activities, including the rationale for policy updates and the outcomes of formal evaluations, are comprehensively documented. This record-keeping fosters institutional memory, supports accountability, and facilitates dialogue about ongoing improvements to ethical standards.

• Continual Monitoring of Inclusivity Metrics:
  The journal tracks inclusivity metrics, including geographic distribution, gender representation, and diversity of thought, to ensure equitable participation in authorship, review, and editorial roles. These metrics are periodically published in an effort to improve transparency and accountability.

Through these structured oversight measures, the journal reinforces confidence in its editorial judgments, cultivates trust among its stakeholders, and sustains a publication environment grounded in ethical excellence.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

When questions arise about the integrity of a submitted or published work, the journal follows a rigorous, transparent, and methodical process to ensure that allegations of misconduct are addressed ethically and comprehensively. These procedures align with the COPE guidelines on managing allegations, safeguarding the credibility of the scientific record and maintaining trust within the academic community. Key stages include:

• Preliminary Assessment:
  Upon receiving an allegation—whether from a reviewer, reader, author, or other concerned party—the editorial office conducts an initial evaluation to determine if the claim is credible and falls within the journal’s scope. If valid concerns are identified, the matter proceeds to formal investigation.

• Investigation and Evidence Gathering:
  The editorial team initiates a detailed inquiry, which may involve requesting explanations from the authors, reviewing original data, consulting independent experts, and examining supporting documentation. Throughout this process, confidentiality is upheld to protect the rights of all parties and prevent premature conclusions.

• Consultation with Relevant Authorities:
  In cases where the complexity or gravity of the alleged misconduct necessitates additional oversight, the journal may consult institutional review boards, research integrity officers, or other regulatory bodies. This ensures that decisions are informed by expert input and guided by best practices.

• Decision and Outcomes:
  Based on the findings, the editorial leadership determines the appropriate course of action. Possible outcomes include issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern, or referring the matter to the authors' affiliated institutions for further investigation. Decisions are communicated transparently, including rationales and any preventative measures to avoid future occurrences.

• Documentation and Follow-Up:
  All steps taken during the investigation, including outcomes and justifications, are thoroughly documented. These records are retained for future audits and to inform policy refinements. If new evidence arises, the journal remains open to revisiting the case to ensure fairness and accountability.

By adhering to these structured procedures, the journal ensures that all allegations of misconduct are handled equitably and decisively, reinforcing the integrity of the research it publishes and maintaining the trust of its stakeholders.

Plagiarism Policy

The journal is committed to maintaining originality and intellectual integrity in all published works. To uphold these principles, the journal implements robust measures to prevent, detect, and address plagiarism, following the COPE guidelines on plagiarism. These measures ensure that all research accurately reflects the contributions of its authors and adheres to the highest ethical standards. Key components of this policy include:

• Routine Screening Procedures:
  All submissions are subjected to plagiarism detection software, such as Turnitin, to identify overlapping text, unattributed quotations, or improperly cited material. Manual checks are also performed to assess potential cases not flagged by automated tools.

• Clear Author Guidelines:
  Authors are provided with explicit instructions on proper citation practices, the use of third-party materials, and the necessity of crediting all sources. Educational resources and examples are shared to promote responsible authorship and reduce the likelihood of unintentional plagiarism.

• Proportionate and Transparent Response:
  When suspected plagiarism is identified, the editorial team assesses the extent and intent of the issue. Authors are given an opportunity to respond. Depending on the severity, appropriate actions—such as requesting revisions, issuing a correction, or retracting the article—are taken. In serious cases, the matter may be referred to the authors’ institutions or other regulatory bodies.

• Educational Support and Resources:
  The journal emphasizes education as a preventative measure. Workshops, webinars, and links to resources on ethical writing practices, such as COPE’s plagiarism policy guidelines, are made available to authors and reviewers.

• Commitment to Fair and Consistent Application:
  Each case of suspected plagiarism is handled individually, with clear and consistent criteria guiding editorial decisions. This approach ensures fairness for all parties and maintains trust in the journal’s review and publication processes.

By implementing these stringent measures and aligning with internationally recognized standards, the journal safeguards the originality of its content, respects intellectual property, and fosters a global culture of academic integrity.

Human and Animal Research Ethics

The journal requires that all research involving human participants or animal subjects be conducted ethically, respecting the welfare of participants and adhering to internationally recognized standards. These requirements align with the Declaration of Helsinki, the ARRIVE guidelines, and other relevant frameworks. By enforcing these principles, the journal ensures the integrity and ethical responsibility of the research it publishes.

• Mandatory Ethical Approval:
  Submissions reporting studies involving humans or animals must include evidence of prior approval by an Institutional Review Board (IRB), Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), or an equivalent ethics oversight body. Authors must provide reference numbers and names of the approving institutions within the manuscript.

• Adherence to International Guidelines:
  Research involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki to ensure respect, safety, and informed consent. Animal research must follow the ARRIVE guidelines to ensure humane treatment and scientific validity.

• Informed Consent Documentation:
  Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all human participants, detailing the scope of consent and any additional safeguards for vulnerable populations. For animal studies, authors must demonstrate compliance with ethical treatment protocols.

• Transparency in Methods and Ethical Compliance:
  Manuscripts must include detailed descriptions of ethical considerations during the study, such as recruitment processes, consent procedures, and steps taken to minimize harm or distress to subjects. These details allow reviewers and readers to assess the study’s adherence to ethical standards.

• Special Considerations for Vulnerable Populations:
  Research involving minors, individuals with limited capacity to consent, or economically disadvantaged groups must demonstrate additional safeguards to protect their rights and well-being. Authors are required to outline these measures explicitly in their manuscripts.

• Consequences for Non-Compliance:
  If a submission is found to have failed in meeting ethical standards, the journal reserves the right to reject the manuscript, issue a correction or retraction for published work, or report the matter to relevant regulatory bodies.

By enforcing rigorous ethical standards for research involving humans and animals, the journal ensures that its publications uphold respect for individual rights, scientific integrity, and the welfare of all subjects involved.

Informed Consent

The journal upholds the principle that all participants involved in research must provide informed consent, ensuring that their participation is voluntary, fully understood, and ethically sound. This policy adheres to internationally recognized standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki, to safeguard the rights, autonomy, and privacy of participants.

• Documentation of Consent:
  Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants before the study commenced. The consent process should include a clear explanation of the research’s purpose, procedures, risks, benefits, and the participant’s right to withdraw without penalty.

• Clarity and Accessibility:
  Information provided to participants must be presented in a format that is clear, concise, and free of technical jargon. Authors should ensure that consent materials are culturally and linguistically appropriate for the study population.

• Ethical Safeguards for Vulnerable Populations:
  For research involving minors, individuals with cognitive impairments, or other vulnerable groups, authors must demonstrate that additional safeguards were implemented. This may include obtaining consent from legal guardians alongside assent from the participant.

• Privacy and Confidentiality:
  The journal requires that authors maintain participant confidentiality by anonymizing identifiable data unless explicit consent for disclosure has been obtained. Data must be stored securely, and authors should describe these measures in their manuscripts.

• Ethical Approval Requirements:
  Submissions must include confirmation that the study was reviewed and approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee. Authors must provide the name of the approving body and any reference numbers.

• Transparency in Reporting:
  Manuscripts must include a statement in the methods section confirming that informed consent was obtained. This statement should specify any conditions under which consent was not required (e.g., secondary use of anonymized data) and justify such exceptions with reference to ethical guidelines.

• Consequences for Non-Compliance:
  Submissions that fail to meet informed consent requirements may be rejected. If a published article is later found to lack appropriate consent, the journal may issue a correction, retraction, or other suitable response in accordance with ethical guidelines.

By mandating robust informed consent procedures, the journal ensures the ethical integrity of published research and protects the dignity and autonomy of all participants involved.

Diversity and Inclusion

The journal is committed to fostering a scholarly environment that values diverse perspectives, encourages participation from underrepresented groups, and ensures equitable treatment for all contributors. In alignment with the principles of the Heterodox Academy, the journal integrates these values into its editorial practices and community engagement efforts. Key aspects of this policy include:

• Merit-Based Evaluation:
  Manuscripts are evaluated exclusively on their intellectual merits, methodological rigor, and relevance to the field, without regard to authors’ demographic background, institutional affiliation, geographic location, or personal identity. This commitment promotes fairness and objectivity in the scholarly review process.

• Equal Opportunities:
  The journal ensures that all individuals are treated fairly and respectfully, without judgment based on personal factors irrelevant to their academic or professional capacities. Policies and practices are designed to promote inclusivity, ensuring that everyone has equal access to opportunities and resources. This commitment to fair treatment and inclusivity underpins all interactions and decisions.

• Elimination of Bias and Discrimination:
  Any suspected instances of bias, whether implicit or explicit, are taken seriously and investigated promptly. The journal addresses potential inequalities through ongoing training, adherence to objective review criteria, and clear guidance to reviewers and editors on recognizing and mitigating bias.

• Encouraging Diverse Perspectives:
  The journal actively encourages submissions from a wide range of perspectives, understanding that diversity of thought enriches academic discourse. Contributions from underrepresented groups and diverse geographical locations are welcomed, ensuring a broad spectrum of voices in the journal’s publications. This approach helps the journal represent a comprehensive array of ideas and viewpoints.

• Conflict Management:
  Recognizing that disagreements and debates are integral to academic discourse, the journal aims to manage conflicts constructively. Different viewpoints are respected while upholding academic standards and integrity. Constructive debate is encouraged, fostering respectful dialogue that advances knowledge and understanding.

By upholding these commitments, the journal not only enhances the quality and breadth of the research it publishes but also contributes to a more equitable, inclusive, and forward-looking academic landscape.

Retractions, Corrections, and Clarifications

The journal is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, and reliability of the scholarly record. To uphold these principles, the journal has established clear and transparent procedures for addressing errors and ensuring that published work remains trustworthy. These practices align with the COPE Retraction Guidelines and other best practices in academic publishing. Key components include:

• Criteria for Amendments:
  The journal distinguishes between various types of amendments based on the nature and severity of the issue:

  • Corrections: For minor errors that do not affect the overall results or conclusions of the study.
  • Retractions: For serious issues, such as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other breaches of research integrity, where the reliability of the findings is compromised.
  • Expressions of Concern: Issued when an investigation into a potential issue is ongoing or inconclusive but raises significant concerns about the validity of the work.

• Investigation and Decision-Making:
  When an issue is reported, the editorial team conducts a thorough investigation, consulting with authors, reviewers, and, if necessary, external experts or the authors’ institutions. The process is guided by principles of fairness, confidentiality, and evidence-based decision-making.

• Transparent Publication of Amendments:
  Any corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern are published openly and linked to the original article. These notices clearly explain the nature of the issue, the actions taken, and their rationale, ensuring that readers have access to a complete and accurate scholarly record.

• Timeliness and Accountability:
  The journal prioritizes prompt action when errors are identified, minimizing the risk of misinformation. Clear timelines for addressing concerns are established to ensure accountability and efficiency.

• Proactive Prevention:
  To reduce the likelihood of post-publication issues, the journal enforces rigorous peer review and editorial processes, promotes transparency in methods and data, and provides authors with resources to support research integrity.

• Follow-Up and Monitoring:
  All retractions, corrections, and expressions of concern are documented and monitored to identify patterns that may inform improvements to editorial policies or practices. The journal is committed to learning from these cases to enhance its contribution to scholarly integrity.

By adhering to these procedures, the journal ensures that the scholarly record remains credible, transparent, and a reliable source of knowledge for the academic community.

Data Availability and Reporting Guidelines

The journal emphasizes transparency and reproducibility in research by asking authors to adhere to established data availability and reporting standards. These practices ensure that readers and reviewers can verify findings, replicate studies, and build upon prior research, aligning with international guidelines such as CONSORT, PRISMA, and STROBE. Key components include:

• Mandatory Data Availability Statements:
  Authors must include a data availability statement in their manuscript, specifying where and how the underlying data can be accessed or explaining any restrictions on data availability. This statement ensures transparency about the research’s foundational data.

• Encouragement of Open Data Practices:
  Authors are encouraged to deposit datasets, code, and other materials in trusted, publicly accessible repositories such as Dryad or Figshare. Persistent identifiers (e.g., DOIs) should be provided to ensure stable access.

• Licensing and Reuse:
  Authors are recommended to use open-access licenses such as CC-BY for data and supplementary materials to facilitate reuse and collaboration while ensuring proper attribution.

• Adherence to Reporting Standards:
  Submissions must comply with established reporting guidelines relevant to the study design:

  • CONSORT: For randomized controlled trials.
  • PRISMA: For systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
  • STROBE: For observational studies.
  • ARRIVE: For animal research.

• Transparency in Methodology and Data Collection:
  Manuscripts should include detailed descriptions of the study design, data collection instruments, and analytic methods, enabling replication and critical evaluation. Authors are encouraged to disclose any software or tools used, ensuring the reproducibility of findings.

• Handling Sensitive or Restricted Data:
  If data cannot be shared openly (e.g., due to privacy concerns or legal restrictions), authors must provide a rationale in the data availability statement and indicate how interested researchers can request access under appropriate safeguards.

• Proactive Peer Review:
  Reviewers are provided with clear guidance on evaluating data availability and adherence to reporting standards. Any concerns about the completeness or transparency of data are addressed during the review process.

• Periodic Review of Data Policies:
  The journal regularly updates its data policies in response to advances in research practices, feedback from the academic community, and emerging ethical considerations related to data sharing.

By enforcing robust data availability and reporting guidelines, the journal supports the integrity, reproducibility, and impact of the research it publishes, fostering trust and collaboration within the academic community.

Reviewer Recognition

The journal acknowledges that peer reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the quality, rigor, and integrity of scholarly publications. Recognizing and supporting their contributions is essential for fostering a robust and equitable peer review process. Key elements of this policy include:

• Formal Acknowledgment:
  Peer reviewers are formally recognized for their contributions through collective acknowledgments published annually. This public recognition highlights the intellectual labor and expertise reviewers bring to the journal.

• Certificates of Review:
  The journal provides reviewers with certificates documenting their service. These certificates can be used for professional development, institutional evaluations, or personal records of academic contributions.

• Professional Development Opportunities:
  To enhance the peer review process and support the growth of reviewers, the journal offers access to resources, guidelines, and training. This includes webinars, workshops, or written materials on best practices in peer review, such as the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

• Transparent Criteria for Recognition:
  The journal ensures that recognition is based on clear, consistent criteria, such as the timeliness and thoroughness of reviews. This approach fosters fairness and transparency in the acknowledgment process.

• Reviewer Feedback Mechanisms:
  Reviewers are invited to provide feedback on the peer review process, allowing the journal to refine its practices and address any challenges or inefficiencies in the system.

• Recognition Beyond Acknowledgment:
  Exceptional reviewers may be invited to join the journal’s editorial board or to participate in mentorship programs for new reviewers, providing further opportunities for professional advancement.

• Continuous Engagement and Support:
  The journal actively engages with its reviewer community, ensuring that reviewers feel valued and supported. Periodic surveys and feedback loops help the journal address reviewer needs and improve their experience.

By implementing these measures, the journal ensures that reviewers are appropriately recognized and supported, reinforcing the importance of their role in the scholarly communication process and fostering a culture of mutual respect and collaboration.

Ethical Conduct of Research

The journal emphasizes that ethical principles must guide all stages of research, from conception to publication. By adhering to established international standards and fostering transparency, the journal ensures that published work reflects both scientific rigor and ethical responsibility. Key aspects of this policy include:

• Adherence to International Standards:
  All research must comply with established ethical guidelines, such as the Declaration of Helsinki for human studies, the ARRIVE guidelines for animal research, and other discipline-specific standards. Authors are responsible for ensuring compliance with institutional, national, and international regulations.

• Transparency in Methodology:
  Authors must provide clear, detailed descriptions of research methods, data collection processes, and analytic techniques. Transparency ensures that the research is reproducible and allows for critical evaluation by the academic community.

• Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI):
  The journal requires full disclosure of any use of AI tools in research design, data analysis, or manuscript preparation. Authors must specify how AI was employed and ensure that its use adheres to ethical guidelines. Misrepresentation of AI-generated content as human-authored work is strictly prohibited.

• Avoidance of Questionable Research Practices:
  Practices such as data fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, or p-hacking are not tolerated. Authors must present findings accurately, including limitations and negative results, to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

• Addressing Ethical Challenges:
  For studies involving sensitive or controversial topics, authors must demonstrate that appropriate safeguards were implemented to minimize risks and protect the rights and dignity of participants. This includes obtaining ethical approval and informed consent where applicable.

• Ongoing Reviewer and Editor Training:
  To ensure ethical oversight, reviewers and editors are provided with training resources on recognizing and addressing ethical issues in submissions. This includes guidance from the COPE Core Practices and other relevant frameworks.

• Retrospective Investigations:
  If ethical concerns are raised about published work, the journal initiates a formal review, consulting with authors, institutions, and external experts as necessary. Outcomes may include issuing corrections, retractions, or other actions to uphold the integrity of the journal.

• Educational Support for Authors:
  The journal provides resources and guidance to help authors understand and adhere to ethical standards. This includes links to relevant guidelines, workshops on responsible research practices, and access to templates for ethical documentation.

By requiring adherence to these principles, the journal ensures that the research it publishes meets the highest ethical standards, safeguarding the trust of the academic community and advancing responsible scholarship.

Post-Publication Policies

The journal recognizes that scholarly communication does not end with publication. Constructive post-publication discussions, updates, and critiques are vital to maintaining the integrity and dynamism of the academic record. To support these goals, the journal has established clear policies for managing post-publication interactions. Key aspects include:

• Facilitating Constructive Debate:
  The journal encourages readers, authors, and researchers to engage in post-publication commentary. Letters to the editor, commentaries, and critiques can be submitted, provided they are evidence-based, respectful, and relevant to the published work. These contributions are reviewed for clarity and validity before publication.

• Updates and Addenda:
  Authors can submit updates or addenda to their published work if significant new findings or developments arise. Such additions must be clearly linked to the original publication and include an explanation of the new content's relevance.

• Post-Publication Peer Review:
  In some cases, the journal may facilitate post-publication peer review, particularly for controversial or high-impact studies. This ensures continued scrutiny and discussion of significant findings while maintaining academic rigor.

• Addressing Critiques and Disputes:
  Authors are given the opportunity to respond to critiques or comments on their work. Responses should address the issues raised in a respectful and scholarly manner, fostering a constructive dialogue that benefits the academic community.

• Corrections and Retractions:
  Any errors identified post-publication are addressed in accordance with the journal’s policy on retractions and corrections. Corrections and clarifications are published promptly and linked to the original article to ensure transparency.

• Public Accessibility of Amendments:
  All post-publication comments, corrections, and updates are made publicly available and permanently archived. This ensures that readers have access to the full scholarly record, including any ongoing discussions or revisions.

• Encouraging Open Science:
  The journal supports the principles of open science by promoting transparency in post-publication commentary and data sharing. Researchers are encouraged to provide supplementary materials and data that enhance the interpretability of their findings.

• Monitoring and Continuous Improvement:
  Post-publication interactions are monitored to identify trends and areas for improvement in the journal’s processes. Feedback from contributors informs updates to these policies, ensuring they remain effective and aligned with community needs.

By facilitating respectful and evidence-based post-publication dialogue, the journal fosters an environment of continual learning and improvement, enhancing the value and reliability of the research it publishes.

Conflict of Interest

The journal is committed to transparency and integrity in the publication process by requiring the disclosure and proper management of potential conflicts of interest (COIs). This ensures that all decisions—whether from authors, reviewers, or editors—are based solely on academic merit and free from undue influence. The journal’s conflict of interest policy aligns with the COPE guidelines on COIs.

• Disclosure Requirements:

  • Authors: Authors must declare all potential financial, personal, or professional conflicts that could influence their work. This includes funding sources, affiliations, or other relationships that might impact the objectivity of the research. A declaration statement must be included in the manuscript.
  • Reviewers: Reviewers must disclose any relationships with the authors or the research topic that may pose a conflict. If a COI exists, reviewers are expected to recuse themselves from the evaluation process.
  • Editors: Editors involved in the review and decision-making process must disclose any conflicts and may delegate responsibility to another editor to ensure impartiality.

• Managing Conflicts of Interest:
  The editorial team assesses disclosed COIs to determine whether they require mitigation. Possible actions include assigning alternative reviewers, excluding specific editors from decision-making, or providing a transparent disclosure statement within the published article.

• Transparency in Published Articles:
  Articles must include a COI statement, even if no conflicts exist. For example: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.” When conflicts are present, a clear explanation of their nature and how they were managed must accompany the article.

• Guidance and Training:
  The journal provides resources and training to authors, reviewers, and editors to help them identify and disclose potential COIs. This includes examples and guidelines to ensure comprehensive and accurate reporting.

• Monitoring and Enforcement:
  The journal regularly reviews COI policies to ensure they remain effective and consistent with industry standards. Instances of undisclosed conflicts discovered post-publication may result in corrective actions, such as issuing an editorial note or retraction.

• Commitment to Fairness and Integrity:
  The journal strives to handle all conflicts impartially and transparently. Disclosure statements and management strategies are designed to preserve trust in the peer review process and the published record.

By requiring and managing COI disclosures, the journal upholds the principles of fairness, impartiality, and academic integrity, ensuring that its publications are credible and free from undue bias.

Authorship and Contributor Roles

The journal adheres to clear and transparent criteria for authorship, ensuring that all individuals who have significantly contributed to the research and publication process receive appropriate credit. This policy aligns with the ICMJE guidelines for authorship and promotes accountability and fairness in the attribution of scholarly work.

• Authorship Criteria:
  To qualify as an author, individuals must meet all of the following criteria:

  • Substantial contributions to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the research.
  • Involvement in drafting or critically revising the manuscript for intellectual content.
  • Approval of the final version to be published.
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work, ensuring its accuracy and integrity.

• Avoidance of Unethical Practices:
  The journal strictly opposes unethical authorship practices, such as:

  • Guest Authorship: Including individuals who made no significant contribution to the work.
  • Ghost Authorship: Excluding individuals who made substantial contributions.
  • Gift Authorship: Adding individuals as a courtesy without meaningful involvement.

• Responsibilities of the Corresponding Author:
  The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

  • All listed authors meet the authorship criteria.
  • All contributors who do not meet the criteria (e.g., technical assistants) are acknowledged appropriately in a separate section.
  • The manuscript complies with all journal policies and guidelines.
  • Accurate information is communicated between the journal and co-authors throughout the review and publication process.

• Resolution of Disputes:
  In cases of authorship disputes, the journal follows COPE’s guidance on managing disputes. Authors are encouraged to resolve disagreements before submission, but if unresolved, the journal may refer the issue to the authors’ institutions for investigation.

• Acknowledgment of Non-Author Contributions:
  Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship (e.g., funding sources, technical support) must be acknowledged in a separate section of the manuscript.

• Transparency in Changes to Authorship:
  Any changes to authorship, including additions, removals, or order adjustments, must be requested in writing by the corresponding author and approved by all co-authors. Changes are not permitted after acceptance unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated.

By ensuring that authorship and contributor roles are transparent and fair, the journal upholds the integrity of the research process and appropriately credits those responsible for the work.

Editorial Independence

The journal is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions are made independently and free from undue influence, safeguarding the integrity and credibility of the peer review and publication process. This policy aligns with the principles of transparency, impartiality, and accountability outlined in the COPE Core Practices.

• Autonomy in Decision-Making:
  Editorial decisions are based solely on the intellectual merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance of submissions to the journal’s scope. External parties, including sponsors, advertisers, and institutional affiliates, have no influence over the editorial process.

• Separation of Editorial and Commercial Functions:
  The journal maintains strict separation between editorial responsibilities and commercial activities, such as advertising, sponsorship, and partnerships. Financial support from external sources does not affect the review, acceptance, or rejection of manuscripts.

• Transparency of Sponsorship and Funding:
  Any financial relationships related to the journal’s operations are disclosed publicly. This ensures that readers and contributors are aware of the nature of any external support and its lack of influence on editorial decisions.

• Confidentiality in Peer Review:
  Editors and reviewers are bound by confidentiality agreements, ensuring that manuscripts under consideration are not shared or discussed with unauthorized individuals. This policy upholds the integrity of the peer review process and protects the authors’ intellectual property.

• Management of Conflicts of Interest:
  Editors must disclose any conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality. In cases where a conflict arises, the editor in question must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript, and another editor is assigned to oversee the review process.

• Commitment to Fair and Impartial Review:
  All submissions are evaluated objectively, regardless of the authors’ institutional affiliations, geographic location, or demographic background. The journal employs double-blind review processes where applicable to minimize bias.

• Editorial Independence in Disputes:
  The editorial team resolves disputes concerning decisions on manuscripts independently and in accordance with journal policies. Appeals are reviewed impartially, and decisions are communicated transparently to all involved parties.

• Periodic Policy Review:
  The journal regularly reviews its editorial independence policies to ensure they remain robust and aligned with evolving standards and best practices in academic publishing.

By upholding editorial independence, the journal ensures that its publications are credible, impartial, and reflective of the highest standards of scholarly integrity.

Responding to New Developments

The journal recognizes that the academic publishing landscape is continually evolving, shaped by technological advances, emerging ethical concerns, and changes in global research standards. To remain at the forefront of ethical publishing practices, the journal is committed to proactively responding to these developments. Key aspects include:

• Regular Policy Reviews:
  The journal conducts periodic reviews of its editorial, ethical, and operational policies to ensure alignment with the latest guidelines and best practices. Updates to frameworks such as the COPE Core Practices or the ICMJE Recommendations are promptly reflected in journal policies.

• Integration of Emerging Technologies:
  The journal continuously evaluates the ethical implications of new technologies in research and publishing, such as artificial intelligence (AI). Clear policies are established to guide the ethical use of tools like AI for data analysis or manuscript preparation, ensuring transparency and adherence to academic integrity.

• Stakeholder Feedback and Engagement:
  Feedback from authors, reviewers, readers, and editors is actively solicited to identify areas where policies or practices may need refinement. This collaborative approach ensures that the journal’s responses to new developments are informed by the needs and perspectives of its community.

• Guidance on Novel Ethical Issues:
  As new ethical challenges emerge—such as those related to data privacy, AI-generated content, or diversity in research—the journal provides updated guidance to authors and reviewers. These updates may include training sessions, FAQs, or detailed policy revisions.

• Timely Communication of Changes:
  The journal ensures that any policy changes or updates are communicated clearly and promptly to all stakeholders. This includes website updates, editorial notes, or direct communications with authors and reviewers, maintaining transparency and trust.

• Continuous Monitoring of Global Standards:
  The journal tracks updates from international organizations such as COPE, ICMJE, and the World Medical Association to ensure its practices remain globally relevant and consistent with the highest standards.

• Proactive Adoption of Industry Innovations:
  The journal embraces advancements in publishing, such as open science initiatives, data-sharing platforms, and preprint repositories, while maintaining rigorous ethical oversight. This ensures that innovative practices are integrated responsibly and effectively.

• Future-Proofing Policies:
  The journal takes a forward-looking approach by anticipating potential ethical and operational challenges. This includes preparing policies for emerging areas such as AI-authored manuscripts, blockchain-based data sharing, or interdisciplinary collaborations.

By maintaining a proactive stance and adapting to new developments, the journal ensures its policies and practices remain ethical, innovative, and aligned with the evolving needs of the academic community.

Clarity on Enforcement and Accountability

The journal is committed to ensuring that its policies are enforced consistently and transparently, holding all stakeholders accountable for upholding the highest ethical standards. By establishing clear enforcement mechanisms and accountability measures, the journal promotes fairness, integrity, and trust throughout the publication process. Key components include:

• Defined Roles and Responsibilities:
  The journal clearly outlines the roles of editors, reviewers, and authors in adhering to its policies. Responsibility for investigating potential ethical breaches rests with the editorial team, which may consult external experts or institutional authorities as needed.

• Structured Investigation Procedures:
  When potential breaches of ethical standards are identified, the journal follows a structured investigation process:

  • Preliminary Assessment: An initial review determines whether the concern is credible and within the journal’s remit.
  • Full Investigation: If warranted, the editorial team gathers evidence, consults relevant parties (e.g., authors, reviewers, or institutions), and documents findings thoroughly.
  • Resolution: Based on the findings, appropriate actions are taken, such as corrections, retractions, or referrals to institutional oversight bodies.

• Transparent Decision-Making:
  The journal communicates the outcomes of investigations clearly and promptly to all involved parties. When actions such as retractions or corrections are required, these are published transparently, ensuring that the scholarly record reflects the necessary changes.

• Appeals Process:
  Authors or reviewers who disagree with an editorial decision have the right to appeal. Appeals are reviewed impartially by a separate editor or committee to ensure fairness and objectivity.

• Monitoring and Continuous Improvement:
  The journal regularly reviews enforcement processes to identify patterns and areas for improvement. Feedback from stakeholders informs updates to policies and practices, ensuring they remain effective and relevant.

• Public Documentation of Actions:
  Significant actions, such as retractions or expressions of concern, are documented and made publicly accessible. These records include a clear explanation of the issue and the steps taken to address it, reinforcing the journal’s commitment to transparency.

• Guidance for Ethical Compliance:
  To prevent ethical breaches, the journal provides resources and guidance to authors, reviewers, and editors. Training sessions, policy manuals, and links to authoritative guidelines (e.g., COPE Core Practices) are made available to support compliance.

• Consequences for Non-Compliance:
  When ethical breaches occur, the journal takes proportionate actions, such as rejecting submissions, issuing retractions, or reporting misconduct to authors’ institutions. These measures are implemented fairly and consistently, ensuring accountability while maintaining trust in the publication process.

By enforcing its policies with clarity and accountability, the journal ensures that ethical standards are upheld consistently, protecting the integrity of the scholarly record and fostering confidence among its stakeholders.