Publication Ethical Policy

The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in scholarly publishing. This Publication Ethics Policy is developed in accordance with the principles and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and internationally recognized standards for responsible research and publication. All parties involved in the publication process—including authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to these ethical principles to ensure the credibility, transparency, and integrity of the scholarly record.

1. Editorial Responsibilities

Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic quality, integrity, and ethical standards of the journal. They must evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on the basis of scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope, while ensuring that the peer review process is fair, objective, independent, and confidential. Editors are required to maintain editorial independence, making decisions free from commercial, institutional, or personal influence, and to treat all submissions without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religious belief, political affiliation, or institutional background. They must ensure compliance with ethical standards relating to research integrity, authorship, and conflicts of interest; take appropriate action when ethical concerns or allegations of misconduct arise; and issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary to preserve the scholarly record. Editors are also responsible for safeguarding the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and the identities of reviewers throughout the editorial and peer-review process.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their research.

  • Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit original work that has not been previously published or simultaneously submitted to another journal. All sources of information, data, and ideas used in the preparation of the manuscript must be properly cited. Manuscripts must be free from plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and inappropriate citation practices. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable.
  • Reporting Standards: Authors must present research findings accurately, clearly, and transparently. They should provide sufficient methodological detail to enable other researchers to replicate or verify the study, avoid fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data, and ensure that results and interpretations are reported honestly and without selective reporting or misrepresentation.
  • Multiple or Redundant Publication: Authors must not submit the same manuscript or substantially similar research to more than one journal simultaneously. Redundant or duplicate publication is considered unethical. Any previously published material included in the manuscript must be properly cited, acknowledged, and justified within the context of the study.
  • Authorship: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions, including conceptualization and study design, data collection or analysis, interpretation of findings, and drafting or critically revising the manuscript. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. Individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.
  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors must provide appropriate acknowledgment of the work of others. Contributions that do not meet authorship criteria—such as technical assistance, institutional support, or other forms of support—should be clearly recognized in the Acknowledgments section.
  • Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain the underlying research data supporting their manuscript and make such data available upon reasonable request by editors, reviewers, or other researchers. Where possible, authors are encouraged to include a data availability statement in the manuscript to enhance transparency, accountability, and reproducibility.
  • Ethical Approval: Research involving human participants or animals must comply with applicable ethical standards and institutional regulations. Authors must confirm that the study received approval from an appropriate institutional ethics review committee and that informed consent was obtained from participants where applicable. The manuscript should clearly state the ethical approval reference number or provide relevant details of the approving institution.
  • Conflict of Interest: Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence or appear to influence the research. If no conflicts exist, authors should include the following statement: “The authors declare that no competing interests exist.”
  • Funding Disclosure: All sources of financial support must be disclosed, including the name of the funding organization and grant numbers where applicable. If no external funding was received, authors should state: “This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a vital role in ensuring the quality, credibility, and integrity of scholarly publications. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts while maintaining strict confidentiality. Manuscripts should be assessed solely on academic merit, originality, clarity, and methodological rigor. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and promptly inform the editor of any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns. Reviewers must decline assignments where a conflict of interest exists and must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal research or professional advantage.

4. Peer Review Process

The journal employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during evaluation. Manuscripts are independently assessed by qualified experts, and editorial decisions are made based on reviewers’ recommendations, scholarly merit, and the editor’s judgment. Authors are informed transparently of editorial decisions, including acceptance, revision, or rejection.

5. Research Integrity and Misconduct

The journal treats allegations of research or publication misconduct seriously. Misconduct may include plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and improper authorship practices. Suspected misconduct is addressed according to COPE procedures, which may include requesting clarification or supporting documentation from authors, rejecting the manuscript, issuing corrections or retractions, and notifying relevant institutions or research bodies when necessary.

6. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

To maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, the journal may issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions. Corrections address minor errors that do not affect overall conclusions. Expressions of concern are issued when potential ethical issues require further investigation. Retractions are implemented when serious errors or misconduct invalidate the findings. All actions are conducted according to internationally recognized publication ethics standards.

7. Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential. Information about manuscripts under review must not be disclosed to anyone except the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial staff, or publisher when necessary. Unpublished materials contained in manuscripts must not be used for personal research or professional advantage without the authors’ explicit consent.

8. Complaints and Appeals

The journal provides a transparent mechanism for handling complaints and appeals. Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal written request to the editorial office, including justification for reconsideration. All complaints related to editorial decisions, ethical concerns, or the peer-review process are addressed in accordance with established editorial procedures and international publication ethics guidelines.

9. Reference Resources

For further clarification and guidance, the following resources are recommended: