Ethical Guidelines
This journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics, scientific rigor, and academic integrity. The journal adheres to the core practices, codes of conduct, and flowcharts established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These ethical standards govern all participants across the scholarly publishing lifecycle: authors, peer reviewers, editors, and the publisher.
Authorship Criteria and Contributor Standards (CRediT Taxonomy)
Authorship must be grounded exclusively on substantive intellectual, conceptual, and empirical contributions to the research. In accordance with COPE and international conventions, each listed author must fulfill all four of the following criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
The journal adopts the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework. An Author Contribution Statement outlining each contributor's specific role (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation, Writing – Original Draft, Supervision) must be presented in a dedicated statement prior to the References section.
Submissions with an exceptionally large number of contributors must include an explicit justification in the cover letter detailing each co-author's substantial intellectual involvement. Contributors who provided purely administrative, translation, financial, or routine technical assistance must be acknowledged in an Acknowledgements section rather than listed as authors. Ghost authorship and gift/honorary authorship are strictly prohibited.
Authors must confirm the definitive author list and ordering prior to initial submission. Any later request to add, remove, or reorder authors requires written consent from all listed and proposed authors, accompanied by documented justification sent to the Editor-in-Chief.
- Serves as the primary liaison between the editorial team, peer reviewers, and co-authors across submission, peer review, revision, and production.
- Ensures that author metadata entered into the OJS platform (names, affiliations, and active emails) matches the manuscript and final galley, so that indexing remains accurate.
- Ensures that all mandatory declarations (AI disclosure, author contributions, funding, and competing interests) are included in the manuscript.
- Receives and coordinates any applicable Article Processing Charge (APC) invoice after acceptance, where the journal charges APCs.
- Proofreads the layout galleys carefully before publication and takes responsibility for their accuracy.
Research Integrity, Declarations & Emerging Technologies
1. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Technologies: Aligned with COPE position statements, generative AI tools and Large Language Models (LLMs) cannot be listed as authors or co-authors, because software cannot be held legally or ethically accountable for manuscript claims. Authors may use AI for language proofreading, translation support, clarity improvements, or copy-editing. If AI tools are used, the tool name, version, and purpose must be documented in an AI Usage Statement before the References. AI tools must not be used to fabricate data or references. Authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy and originality of all content.
2. Conflict of Interest / Competing Interests: All commercial, personal, political, or institutional relationships that could influence the research must be declared in a Conflict of Interest Statement prior to the References. If none exist, authors must state this explicitly.
3. Research Funding: All financial support, grants, contracts, or institutional backing must be disclosed in a Funding Statement, including funder names and grant numbers. If the study was self-funded, authors must state that no external funding was received.
4. Plagiarism, Data Fabrication & Redundancy: Plagiarism in any form, including verbatim copying, uncredited paraphrasing, data falsification or fabrication, image manipulation, and duplicate publication, is serious academic misconduct. Submissions are screened with similarity-checking software. Manuscripts whose similarity exceeds the threshold stated in the journal's Author Guidelines may be declined or returned for substantial revision.
5. Research Involving Human Participants: Studies involving human participants, patient records, or behavioral research must provide ethical approval from a recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee, following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent must be obtained from participants before the study begins.
6. Copyright & Open Access: Articles are published under the open access license stated on the journal's About page. Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal the right of first publication. Authors confirm that the manuscript is original and that permission has been obtained for any third-party tables, illustrations, or datasets.
Peer Reviewer Standards and Code of Conduct
Submissions that pass initial editorial screening are evaluated through double-blind peer review by independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewers are expected to submit their evaluation within the timeframe stated in the review invitation. Assessments must be objective, technically thorough, constructive, and respectful.
- Provide balanced, evidence-based critiques addressing theoretical soundness, methodological validity, and clarity.
- Treat all manuscripts, data, and editorial communications as confidential.
- Do not use unpublished data, arguments, or ideas from a manuscript for personal, laboratory, or institutional advantage.
- Do not delegate or subcontract a review to colleagues or students without written consent from the handling editor.
- Do not upload unpublished manuscripts to third-party generative AI platforms, to protect author confidentiality and intellectual property.
- Disclose any competing financial, collaborative, or personal relationships immediately and decline the review where bias is possible.
- Alert the editorial team if misconduct (such as redundant publication, manipulated images, plagiarism, or undeclared AI-generated content) is suspected.
Editorial Responsibilities, Independence & Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief holds final authority and public accountability for the content published in the journal. Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, novelty, methodological rigor, clarity, and ethical compliance, independent of institutional, geographic, or commercial influence. Decisions follow the standard OJS options:
- Accept Submission: The manuscript meets the scope, quality, formatting, and declaration requirements and raises no ethical concerns.
- Revisions Required: The study is sound and needs only minor technical clarifications, layout adjustments, or bibliographic refinements.
- Resubmit for Review: The study has potential but requires substantial additional work, re-analysis, or restructuring, and is typically re-evaluated by the original reviewers.
- Resubmit Elsewhere: The study is sound but falls outside the journal's scope and may suit another publication venue.
- Decline Submission: The submission has critical methodological deficiencies, irremediable analytical flaws, or lacks scientific contribution.
The editorial team coordinates workflow, monitors turnaround times, checks metadata, and facilitates communication between authors and reviewers. Editorial board members provide academic guidance. Production and technical staff handle typesetting and preservation and do not take part in peer-review decisions.
Ethical Concerns, Appeals & Complaints Procedure
Authors, reviewers, or third parties with legitimate concerns about publication misconduct, authorship disputes, or suspected data fabrication should contact the Editor-in-Chief through the Contact page of this journal. If the concern involves the Editor-in-Chief, it should be addressed to the Publisher.
Complaints and investigations are handled in accordance with the relevant COPE Flowcharts. The editorial office ensures objective inquiry, the author's right of reply, documentation of the process, and contact with the relevant institutions when needed.
Post-Publication Corrections (Corrigenda & Errata)
The journal is committed to keeping the scholarly record accurate. When errors are found in a published article, one of two approaches is used:
- Silent Correction: Minor spelling, typographical, or layout fixes that do not affect findings, interpretation, or authorship may be updated directly in the online galleys without a separate notice.
- Formal Correction (Corrigendum / Erratum): Substantive errors in formulas, calculations, figures, affiliations, or authorship are corrected through a citable correction notice linked to the original article.
Retraction Policy and Archival Integrity
The journal follows the COPE Retraction Guidelines. An article may be retracted if it contains fabricated, falsified, or unreproducible data; is a redundant or duplicate publication; contains plagiarism; infringes copyright; or seriously violates research ethics.
Retracted articles are not removed from the archive. The PDF is kept and clearly marked "RETRACTED", and the title is prefixed with "RETRACTED:". A citable Retraction Note explains the reason for retraction. Any Article Processing Charge paid for a retracted article is non-refundable, where APCs apply.