Ethics Statements
Table of Contents
- A General Approach to Ethics
- Publication Ethics Statement
- Responsibilities of Editors, Authors, and Reviewers
- The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies
- Publisher's Responsibilities
- Dealing with Unethical Behavior
- Human Subjects Protection Statement
- Anonymity
- Confidentiality
- Transparency
- Complaints Policy
A General Approach to Ethics
Ethics is an integral part of research from start to finish, and ethical compliance is key to research excellence. From the conceptual stage of the publication, a thorough ethical evaluation is necessary to comply with the legal framework and improve research quality. Ethical research involves applying ethical principles and laws to all scientific research across all domains.
The journal follows COPE's recommendations and core practices (publicationethics.org/core-practices ) regarding ethical policies and misconduct. Falsifying data, plagiarising, and breaching confidentiality are misconduct. The publisher and editors-in-chief will consider each case and contact the author (or reviewer). Severe misconduct may result in contacting the author's or reviewer's institution. If misconduct is suspected during the review process, the manuscript will be held until it is resolved. Misconduct discovered after publication will result in retraction.
Publication Ethics Statement
Innovation Journal of Social Sciences and Economic Review (IJSSER) publishes high-quality work by enforcing a rigorous peer-review process and ensuring that high-quality scientific works are added to the field of scholarly publication. In cases of plagiarism, data falsification, and incorrect authorship credit, we take these ethical publication issues very seriously and follow a zero-tolerance policy. We uses TURNITIN for all submissions to ensure originality. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Responsibilities of Editors, Authors, and Reviewers
Editors' Responsibilities
- Fair Policy: Editors ensure that submitted articles are given fair review, considering each on its academic merits regardless of the author's race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional connection.
- Communication and publication process: Editors enable contact with all parties involved in the publishing process and ensure that manuscripts are handled and processed promptly and efficiently.
- Editors are solely responsible for a manuscript's approval or rejection. While an editor may seek advice from an initial review, if a manuscript is deemed improper for publication, it may be rejected without review.
- Editors establish clear guidelines and criteria throughout the double-blind peer-review procedure.
- All published research publications are subjected to a double-blind peer review procedure by expert reviewers.
- Confidentiality and Transparency: Editors are responsible for ensuring that the external double-blind peer review process remains confidential and that reviewers and authors maintain their anonymity. In addition, the reviewers and authors all admitted to a conflict of interest. Editors look into and document any complaints that may arise throughout the publishing process and offer all parties involved the opportunity to defend their perspectives.
- Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: A situation that involves personal relationships (such as a friend, colleague, or family member), business relationships (such as working in a company that is in direct competition), or financial influences (such as funding) and that has the potential to influence the judgment of any person during the publication of the journal is known as a conflict of interest.
- Editors are not allowed to participate in publishing decisions in which there is a potential conflict of interest (COI). For instance, if an article written by the Editor-in-Chief is submitted to the journal, another editor will manage the peer review process and make all necessary editorial decisions.
- Editors look into and document any complaints that may arise throughout the publishing process, and they offer all parties involved a chance to defend their perspectives.
- Editors encourage the release of revisions in the event of errors and, if required, the retraction of articles. But in such cases, if the paper contains a libel, corrections or retractions may be required if the published wrong author's information like such as the name. Affiliation and email address, if the main substance of a published article is wrong, and the article contains information that has not been properly recognized or cited.
- For the complete Peer review Process ↗.
Authors' Responsibilities
Authors must follow the journal's guidelines for authors.
- The authors submit a manuscript containing accurate and original data and an objective appraisal of its importance.
- Authors must follow the journal's Plagiarism policy. Because Plagiarism is not tolerated for submitted content if found. Plagiarism is a major violation of the fundamental principles and foundations of research that must not be accepted.
- To allow their peers to replicate the work, authors include full references to all sources of information.
- Other scholarly work is considered fairly and objectively by the authors, with no personal criticism expressed or implied.
- Authors avoid using fictitious data and offer a declaration stating that all data utilized in the study are real and legitimate.
- At each stage of the research and publication process, authors disclose any conflicts of interest that can jeopardize their academic credibility. If applicable, writers list the sources of funding for their research.
- The authors confirm that the paper has not been submitted and accepted for publication elsewhere. Authors cite those sources that are already published.
- Authors are required to have their submissions peer-reviewed and to work closely with the editors.
- Authors indicate co-authors who contributed significantly to the submitted work and who share responsibility and liability for the outcomes.
- If substantial errors in their work and/or sources are discovered before or after publication, authors must immediately notify the editorial board and assure full cooperation with the editorial board to remedy such errors, publish an update, or withdraw the manuscript as needed.
Reviewers' Responsibilities
- Reviewers must follow the journal's review guidelines to ensure a fair review process and maintain content quality. For more review Guidelines ↗
- If any reviewer believes that he or she will be unable to complete the review of the manuscript within the time frame specified, he or she must notify the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.
- Reviewers help editors improve the quality of research articles by assessing manuscripts objectively and efficiently.
- The reviewers explain why they gave the manuscripts such a high rating. Any declaration of a previously published observation, derivation, or argument must be accompanied by the appropriate citation.
- Reviewers will point it out if relevant public or unpublished work is used but not cited in a manuscript.
- While a manuscript review may justify the criticism, reviewers avoid making personal or spiteful remarks about the author.
- All reviewed articles are kept confidential by reviewers, who do not copy or share them in any way.
- Reviewers confirm that they have no conflicts of interest regarding the study topic, the authors, and/or other parties involved. And they have to declare any such conflicts of interest in advance and immediately resign from the assignment.
- All reviewed articles are kept confidential by reviewers, who do not copy or share them in any way.
The Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies
-This policy aims to provide greater transparency and guidance to authors, editors, and reviewers regarding generative AI and AI-assisted technologies. We will closely monitor ongoing developments in this area and will adjust or refine the policy as appropriate. The following guidance is specifically for reviewers.
-When a subject matter expert is invited to participate in the review process, the material/manuscript must be treated as confidential. Reviewers should not upload the material/manuscript or any part thereof into a generative AI tool, as this may violate our policy and/or the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the material/manuscript contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.
-This confidentiality requirement extends to all communication about the material/manuscript, including any reviewer questionnaires, reports, or correspondence, as these may contain confidential information about the material/manuscript, and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their communications or any related material into an AI tool, even if it is just to improve language and readability.
-We abide by the highest standards of integrity in the review process, which implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the review of the material/manuscript, as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for review are outside the scope of this technology, and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review.
-AI policy for book authors states that authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their work and with the appropriate disclosure, as per our instructions in our Guide for Authors.
-Please note that we employs identity-protected AI-assisted technologies that conform to the Responsible AI Principles. These in-house or licensed technologies respect confidentiality. Our programs are subject to rigorous evaluations of bias and comply with data privacy and data security requirements.
Publisher's Responsibilities
-The publisher ensures that all actors engaged in the publication process follow the journal's publishing ethics principles and deal with unethical activity if found.
-The publisher is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the academic record.
-All levels of the publication process are promoted by the publisher, and it ensures that intellectual standards are not compromised by financial considerations and interests.
-In close collaboration with the editorial board, reviewers, and authors, the publisher is continually working to improve models of good practice.
Dealing with Unethical Behavior
To safeguard the integrity of the academic record and its contributors, any violation of these guidelines shall be dealt with in the manner described below:
-Identification of the problem and communication to the editorial board as soon as possible (including information on where and how the code of ethical behaviour has been violated).
-Evidence collecting and thorough evaluation are carried out under the supervision of the editorial board (full documentation of evidence must be provided and investigated for its credibility).
-The party accused of wrongdoing is given a fair chance to react to the allegations and fix the wrongdoing, along with a warning to follow ethical norms in the future.
Human Subjects Protection Statement
This statement's purpose is to explain the survey methods and the human participant protection review process. This protects survey participants while also preserving the research's integrity. This information helps researchers understand how these processes are used in survey research. It covers survey participation, risk, anonymity and confidentiality, survey benefits, and informed consent. This statement assists authors in determining whether human research participants have been adequately protected when a survey interview or questionnaire study is proposed. It covers a variety of scenarios. The key points are listed below.
Because they participate in surveys, respondents are rarely exposed to any greater dangers than those inherent in everyday life. The majority of surveys advance knowledge and, more broadly, society. The survey is the only method that can provide generalizable information on various aspects of the human condition. Collecting survey data is critical for improving our understanding of social, psychological, and political processes and evaluating and improving public policy. Documenting the participant's consent in a survey is typically impossible and can hurt the number of people who respond to the survey. However, the most important aspects of consent can be conveyed to respondents in a condensed form at the very beginning of every survey in all survey-based studies. This can be done in a telephone interview's brief introductory statements, a cover letter for a self-administered survey, or the introductory screen in a web survey. This is because each of these types of surveys presents the key elements of consent in a unique format. This is true regardless of risk level and is consistent with the modern view of consent as a continuous process rather than a document.
Anonymity
IJSSER does not reveal reviewers' identities to authors or other reviewers unless requested. We prefer that reviewers remain anonymous during and after the review process. Before revealing their identities, reviewers should consider being asked to comment on other reviewers' criticisms and further manuscript revisions. Identified reviewers may have trouble being objective.
Reviewers are not permitted to reveal their identities to authors unless the editor gives them express permission. They should go through the editor if they want to reveal their identities while the manuscript is still being considered, because it is their responsibility. If this is not possible, authors should inform the editor as soon as the reviewer reveals their identity to them.
We oppose authors confronting or identifying reviewers. We don't confirm or deny rumors about reviewers' identities and encourage reviewers to do the same.
Confidentiality
The Editors in Chief/editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Transparency
For transparency, the journal issued a verifiable reviewer certificate and added the reviewer's name to the Editorial Masthead page.
Complaints Policy
To ensure the quality of service and long-term relationships with its stakeholders, the publisher has a complaint policy in an accountable way. The aim of this policy is to ensure that ICRP treats complaints with an immediate response in a polite and confidential manner. We learn from the complaints and use them to improve our service. For any complaint, please email publications@icrp.org.uk .