Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives (JIP) is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in research publication. The journal follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and expects all parties involved in the publication process (authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher) to adhere to the policies below.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authorship. Authorship should be limited to those who made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. The order of authorship and other credits should reflect each person's actual scientific or professional contribution, regardless of academic rank or position. Holding an administrative title, such as department head, does not by itself qualify a person for authorship. In student–faculty collaborations, the student should be listed as the principal author of any article substantially based on the student's thesis or dissertation. Faculty advisers should discuss publication credit with students early in the research process and revisit it as needed. All authors must sign an authorship agreement, and the corresponding author must confirm that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission.

Changes in authorship. The list and order of authors should be finalized before submission. Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be sent to the Editorial Board by the corresponding author. The request must explain the reason for the change and include written agreement from all authors, including any author being added or removed. Changes are not made until this agreement is received. After acceptance, authorship changes are considered only in exceptional circumstances. After publication, any change can be made only through a formal correction.

Duplicate and redundant publication. Authors must not submit data, findings, or manuscripts that have already been published. Submitting a manuscript that repeats the theories, data, discussions, or conclusions of a previously published paper is redundant publication. It is a form of misconduct related to plagiarism, but it involves reusing data, images, and hypotheses rather than copying sentences. Authors must also not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at a time. On submission, authors must confirm that the work is original and not under consideration elsewhere. Duplicate or concurrent publication is unethical and may result in rejection, retraction, or other sanctions.

Self-citation. Authors should cite their own previous work only when it is directly relevant to the current study. Self-citation is appropriate when a new paper builds on the author's earlier research, but authors should not expand the scope of a manuscript simply to cite their own publications.

Data access and retention. Authors should not withhold data from qualified researchers who wish to verify the findings through reanalysis, provided participant confidentiality can be protected and no legal restrictions prevent release. Authors may ask those requesting the data to cover the cost of providing it. Researchers who obtain data for reanalysis may use them only for that purpose and must obtain the original authors' written consent for any other use.

Accuracy of reporting. Authors must present their results honestly and discuss their significance objectively. Data must be represented accurately, with enough detail and references to allow others to verify and build on the work. Fabricated, falsified, or knowingly misleading statements are unethical and unacceptable.

Originality and plagiarism. Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Ideas, data, or wording taken from other sources must be properly cited or quoted. The similarity index of a submitted manuscript must be below 20%, as measured by Turnitin or comparable plagiarism detection software.

Acknowledgment of sources. Authors must give proper credit to the work of others, including publications that influenced the framing of the study.

Use of generative AI. Generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as large language models, cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility for the work, approve the final manuscript, or be held accountable for its content. Authors who use AI tools in preparing a manuscript, whether for drafting text, summarizing literature, analyzing data, or producing figures, must disclose this in the Methodology section or in an acknowledgment. The disclosure must name the tool and describe what it was used for. Basic spelling and grammar checkers do not need to be disclosed. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all content, including any content produced with AI assistance, and must verify all AI-generated text and references. AI-generated or AI-altered images are not permitted unless they are part of the research design, in which case the method must be described.

Research involving human participants. Studies involving human participants must have been approved by an appropriate institutional review board or research ethics committee before data collection began. Authors must state the name of the approving body and the approval or reference number in the Ethical Considerations section. Informed consent must be obtained from all participants. For participants below 18 years of age, consent must be obtained from a parent or legal guardian, together with the participant's assent. Authors must protect participants' privacy and must not include identifying information unless the participant has given written consent for its publication. If a study was exempted from ethics review, authors must explain why and name the body that granted the exemption. Studies involving animals must comply with applicable institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of animals.

Conflicts of interest and funding. Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence, or appear to influence, the results or their interpretation. All sources of funding for the study must be declared in the disclosure form.

Errors in published work. If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article, they must promptly notify the Editorial Board. The Board will work with the authors to determine whether a correction or a retraction is appropriate.

Responsibilities of Editors

Publication decisions. The editor is responsible for deciding which submitted articles are published and is accountable for everything the journal publishes. Decisions are guided by the journal's policies and standards, and the editor may consult other editors or reviewers in reaching them.

Fair play. Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual merit, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or political beliefs.

Confidentiality. The editor and 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, as appropriate. Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, or any part of them, to generative AI tools, as this may breach confidentiality and the authors' rights.

Use of unpublished material. Editors must not use unpublished material from a submitted manuscript in their own research without the authors' written consent. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.

Editorial independence and conflicts of interest. Editors must ensure that commercial considerations, such as advertising or reprint revenue, do not influence editorial decisions, and that peer review is fair and impartial. Editors must not handle manuscripts with which they have a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest; such manuscripts are assigned to another editor or board member.

Handling misconduct. Editors must investigate any suspected research or publication misconduct, including concerns about the conduct of editors or reviewers. Complaints involving data manipulation, plagiarism, text recycling, or other research misconduct must be documented in detail, including who was involved, what occurred, when and where it occurred, and why it is a concern. For plagiarism or text recycling, the specific source texts or articles must be identified. Editors handle such cases in line with COPE guidance.

Corrections and retractions. Editors are responsible for maintaining the integrity of the published record. They must be prepared to issue corrections, clarifications, expressions of concern, retractions, or apologies when needed, as described under "Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions" below. Where contributors are found to have undisclosed competing interests, editors will consider appropriate corrective action.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editor's communication with the authors, helps authors improve their manuscripts.

Promptness and competence. Invited reviewers who feel unqualified to evaluate a manuscript, or who cannot complete the review on time, should notify the editor immediately so that another reviewer can be invited.

Confidentiality. Manuscripts under review are confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with anyone except as authorized by the editor. Reviewers must not upload manuscripts, or any part of them, to generative AI tools, and must not use such tools to write their review reports.

Objectivity. Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and support them with reasoned arguments.

Acknowledgment of sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other published work they are aware of.

Conflicts of interest. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

Confidentiality

JIP is committed to protecting the privacy of everyone involved in the publication process. Information about authors and reviewers, including correspondence, is shared only with the editors and editorial staff. Details of submitted manuscripts are accessible only to the editors, editorial staff, the corresponding author, and invited reviewers.

Correspondence and Notifications

JIP responds promptly to communications from authors and reviewers. Authors are notified of the status of their manuscripts once review results are available.

Plagiarism and Misconduct Sanctions

All submitted manuscripts are screened for originality using plagiarism detection software, and the editorial team checks the accuracy of reported data. Manuscripts found to contain plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, or duplicate publication will be rejected. If misconduct is confirmed after publication, the article will be retracted in accordance with the journal's retraction policy.

Depending on the severity of the case, the journal may also take one or more of the following actions: notify the authors' institutions or funding agencies; bar the authors from submitting to JIP for a period of [two to five] years; or, for serious or repeated misconduct, bar the authors permanently. Authors are given an opportunity to respond to the allegations before sanctions are imposed.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

JIP is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record and follows COPE guidance in amending published articles.

Corrections. When an error in a published article affects its accuracy or interpretation but does not undermine its findings, the journal publishes a correction notice. The notice is linked to the original article, and the article is updated. Errors introduced by the journal during production are corrected by the journal. Errors made by the authors are corrected upon their request or with their agreement.

Expressions of concern. When there is credible evidence of a serious problem with a published article but an investigation is ongoing or inconclusive, the editor may publish an expression of concern. It will be updated or withdrawn once the matter is resolved.

Retractions. An article will be retracted when there is clear evidence that its findings are unreliable, whether through misconduct (such as data fabrication or falsification) or honest error. An article will also be retracted if it involves plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research, or undisclosed conflicts of interest that invalidate its conclusions. Retractions may be initiated by the authors or by the editor. A retraction notice stating the reason is published and linked to the article. The retracted article remains available online and is clearly marked as retracted, so that the scholarly record is preserved. An article is removed entirely only in exceptional cases, such as legal infringement or a serious risk to individuals, and a notice explaining the removal is published in its place.

Appeals and Complaints

Appeals. Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a factual error or on a misunderstanding of their manuscript may submit an appeal. Appeals must be sent to info@jippublication.com within 30 days of the decision. An appeal must state the grounds for the appeal and respond point by point to the reviewers' or editor's comments. Appeals are assessed by an editor who was not involved in the original decision, and the Editor-in-Chief's decision on the appeal is final. Only one appeal is considered per manuscript. Manuscripts under appeal must not be submitted to another journal until the appeal is resolved.

Complaints. Complaints about the journal's editorial processes, the conduct of editors or reviewers, or suspected misconduct in a published article may be sent to info@jippublication.com. Each complaint should describe the concern and include any supporting evidence. The journal will acknowledge receipt within 7 working days and will investigate in accordance with COPE guidance, keeping the complainant informed of the outcome. Complaints about the Editor-in-Chief will be handled by the publisher. Complainants who are not satisfied with the outcome may refer the matter to COPE.