Publishing Ethics and COPE Guidelines

Publishing Ethics and the Committee on Publication Ethics are the principles and guidelines that uphold integrity, transparency, and fairness in the publication of research, scholarly articles, or any other forms of academic or professional writing. These principles aim to ensure the credibility of the work, protect authors, and maintain the trust of the readership.

Publication Ethics:

Below are the key aspects of publishing ethics that researchers, authors, editors, and publishers should adhere to:

• Authorship and Acknowledgment: Authorship should reflect those who contributed significantly to the research. The order of authorship must be agreed upon by all contributors, and anyone who should be acknowledged for their contributions should be included in the acknowledgements section.
• Conflicts of Interest: Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any financial, personal, or professional conflicts of interest that could influence their objectivity or the outcomes of the research.
• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and properly cites any sources, data, or ideas taken from other researchers. Plagiarism, whether intentional or accidental, is strictly prohibited.
• Data Fabrication and Falsification: Researchers should not manipulate, falsify, or fabricate data. Ethical publishing requires transparency and honesty about research methods, results, and findings.
• Peer Review and Confidentiality: Reviewers should maintain confidentiality regarding manuscripts under review. They must evaluate manuscripts fairly, objectively, and constructively, without bias.
• Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: Publishing the same work in multiple places without proper citations constitutes unethical behaviour. Authors should avoid reusing large portions of their previous works (self-plagiarism) unless appropriately referenced.
• Retractions and Corrections: If an article contains errors, misinformation, or ethical violations, retractions or corrections should be issued to maintain the accuracy of the scientific record.
• Authorship Criteria: Authorship should be based on substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research. All individuals who qualify as authors should be listed in the byline.
• Acknowledgement of Contributors: All individuals who provided significant assistance, such as technical support, writing assistance, or funding, should be acknowledged appropriately, even if they are not authors.
• Corresponding Author: One author should be designated as the corresponding author to handle the manuscript and correspondence during the publication process.
• Original Work: Authors should submit only original research that has not been published or is under consideration elsewhere. Proper citation and attribution should be given to prior work to avoid any plagiarism.
• Duplicate Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals or publishers simultaneously without clear disclosure is unethical.
• Honesty in Data: Authors must present their data honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or manipulation. Any errors or inaccuracies in the data should be corrected promptly upon discovery.
• Data Access and Retention: Authors may be required to provide raw data and materials on request to enable verification of the results. Proper retention of data for a reasonable period after publication should be ensured.
• Disclosure of Conflicts: Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation of research or the review process. Financial, professional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the work should be openly acknowledged.
• Transparency in Funding: Sources of funding for the research must be disclosed in the manuscript, ensuring there is no influence from funders on the research process or outcomes.
• Confidentiality: Peer reviewers should treat manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not disclose or discuss the contents of the manuscript outside the review process.
• Objective Evaluation: Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on their scientific merit, originality, relevance, and clarity, not on personal biases. Any reviewer with conflicts of interest should recuse themselves from the review process.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide constructive, detailed feedback to authors, aiding them in improving the manuscript.
• Research Misconduct: Research misconduct, including falsification of data, misrepresentation of findings, and unethical research practices, should be reported and addressed.
• Corrections and Retractions: Authors and publishers must address errors or issues in published work promptly. If a significant error is found, a correction or retraction should be issued following the publisher’s policy.
• Respect for Intellectual Property: Any form of infringement on intellectual property, such as using copyrighted material without permission, is prohibited. Proper permission and citation should be obtained for copyrighted content.
• Informed Consent: Obtain informed consent from participants in research studies and protect their privacy.
• Transparency: Be transparent about the research process, including funding sources and any limitations.
• Reporting Errors: If errors are discovered after publication, promptly inform the journal, and correct them.
• Use of AI: Clearly describe any use of AI or machine learning tools in the research or manuscript preparation.

Publication Ethics for Editors:

• Editorial Independence: Editors should make decisions based on the quality and scientific merit of the manuscript, free from any commercial, political, or personal influence.
• Confidentiality: Editors should maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts and the peer review process.
• Fairness and Transparency: Editorial decisions should be made transparently and based on clear, objective criteria. Authors should be informed about the status of their submissions on time.
• Handling Complaints and Appeals: Editors should provide clear procedures for handling complaints, appeals, and ethical concerns raised by authors or reviewers.
• Respect for Privacy: Authors and publishers must respect the privacy of individuals, including patient confidentiality and anonymity, and must comply with relevant privacy laws and regulations.
• Plagiarism Check: Manuscripts should undergo plagiarism checks before being published to ensure the integrity of the content.
• Regulatory Compliance: Research and publication must comply with relevant legal and regulatory standards, such as data protection laws, copyright laws, and ethical research standards.

By adhering to these principles, researchers, authors, editors, and publishers contribute to maintaining the integrity of academic publishing and promoting the responsible dissemination of knowledge.

Peer Review Process:

All manuscripts submitted must follow the structure, focus, scope, and author guidelines of the journal. The submitted manuscripts must address scientific merit or novelty appropriate to the focus and scope. The editor–in–chief has the right to reject articles that do not meet the theme or the Guidance for Authors requirements. All manuscripts must be free from plagiarized content.

The research article submitted to this journal will be peer-reviewed with a double-blind review. Peer Review Statement Quality is ensured by rigorous and integrity, anonymous peer evaluation of each main paper by three independent referees. The reviewers give scientific valuable comments improving the contents of the manuscript.

The final decision on article acceptance will be made by the Editor, on behalf of the Editorial Board according to the reviewer’s comments. Publication of accepted articles, including the sequence of published articles, will be made by Editor–in–Chief by considering the sequence of accepted data and the geographical distribution of authors as well as a thematic issue.

Review Outcomes: Utilizing feedback from the peer review process, the Editor will make a final publication decision. Decisions categories include,

• Reject: Rejected manuscripts will not be published and authors will not have the opportunity to resubmit a revised version of the manuscript.
• Resubmit for Review: The submission needs to be reworked, but with significant changes, may be accepted. However, It will require a second round of review.
• Accept with Revisions: Manuscripts receiving an accept-pending-revisions decision will be published in IRMM under the condition that minor/major modifications are made. Revisions will be reviewed by an editor to ensure necessary updates are made before publication.
• Accept: Accepted manuscripts will be published in the current form with no further modifications required.

After reviewing, all the corresponding information is sent to the author. Then, the author finalizes the article and sends the final version of it to the editor’s office.

Reviewer Responsibilities

• All details about articles should be kept secret and treated as privileged information by reviewers.
• Reviews should be neutral and free of personal insults to the author.
• Reviewers should explain their opinions clearly and provide evidence to back them up.
• Reviewers should look for relevant published work that the authors haven’t included.
• Reviewers should alert the Editor in Chief to any significant resemblance or overlap between the article under consideration and any other published paper about which they are personally aware.
• Reviewers should avoid reviewing submissions in which they have a competing, collaborating, or other relationship or connection with any of the authors, corporations, or institutions associated with the articles.

COPE Guidelines for Stakeholders:

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) provides the core principles that form the foundation of ethical publishing practices, ensuring that the research process is conducted with the highest standards of integrity, fairness, accountability, and transparency.

1. Integrity refers to the commitment to accurate, honest, and ethical publication practices. This principle emphasizes that authors should present their research truthfully, without manipulating data or fabricating results. Editors and reviewers, too, are expected to evaluate manuscripts based on their merit, adhering to the truth of the research and ensuring that all published work is reliable and valid.
2. Accountability is about taking responsibility for one’s actions throughout the publishing process. Authors are accountable for the originality of their work, ensuring that all data is presented correctly and with proper citations. Editors and reviewers must also be held accountable for their decisions, and if issues arise, such as allegations of misconduct or errors in a published article, the responsible parties must address these promptly and fairly.
3. Fairness involves making unbiased, impartial decisions during the review and publication process. This principle requires editors and reviewers to assess manuscripts based solely on the research quality and relevance, not on personal preferences, institutional affiliations, or other potential biases. The decision-making process should be fair to all authors and maintain consistency across submissions.
4. Transparency calls for openness about the policies, procedures, and decisions that guide the publishing process. Journals must communicate their editorial policies and provide authors with transparent guidance regarding the submission, review, and publication processes. Additionally, editors should ensure that all decisions, such as rejections or revisions, are explained clearly and justly to authors. This transparency helps build trust in the academic publishing process and ensures that ethical practices are followed consistently.

Together, these principles help maintain the integrity of academic publishing, ensuring that research is conducted and disseminated responsibly, fairly, and transparently. The COPE also stipulates policies, and a code of conduct for editors and publishers to ensure the integrity and ethical management of academic publishing as below.

• Transparency and Fairness in Peer Review: Editors must ensure a transparent, unbiased, and fair peer review process, and be impartial in their handling of manuscripts. Editors should take steps to address any potential conflicts of interest or biases.
• Handling of Allegations of Misconduct: COPE provides guidelines for handling allegations of misconduct, including issues of plagiarism, authorship disputes, and falsification of data. The process should be thorough and transparent, with a fair opportunity for the accused to respond.
• Retraction and Correction Procedures: Editors must act when errors are found in a published article. If an article contains significant errors, it may need to be retracted or corrected. The journal should have a clear policy on how retractions and corrections are handled.
• Publication Ethics Policies: Editors and publishers must have clear and publicly available policies on authorship, conflicts of interest, peer review, and other aspects of publishing ethics.
• Handling Competing Interests: Editors, authors, and reviewers must declare any competing interests (e.g., financial interests, personal relationships) that could affect the publication process.
• Ethical Use of Research: Editors and authors must ensure that the research published adheres to ethical standards, particularly when dealing with vulnerable populations, animals, or controversial topics.
• Appeals and Complaints: Journals should provide a clear mechanism for authors to appeal editorial decisions or file complaints about the review process, ensuring fairness and transparency.

The publishing ethics and adherence to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines are essential for maintaining the integrity, credibility, and trustworthiness of the academic publishing process. By prioritizing principles such as integrity, accountability, fairness, and transparency, authors, editors, and reviewers can contribute to a scholarly environment that values truth, ethical conduct, and the accurate dissemination of knowledge. COPE’s guidelines provide clear frameworks for addressing ethical challenges that may arise during publication, ensuring that research is presented honestly and responsibly. Ultimately, upholding these standards not only supports the individual academic community but also fosters greater trust and collaboration in the global research landscape, promoting the advancement of knowledge responsibly and ethically. Ultimately, adhering to publishing ethics and COPE guidelines strengthens the foundation of academic research, ensuring that publications contribute meaningfully to scientific progress and societal understanding. By prioritizing ethics, the academic community upholds the principles of honesty, reliability, and fairness, which are critical to the credibility of scholarly work and the advancement of knowledge.