The Editorial Board, Staff, and Authors of the Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives (JIP) are committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in research publications. We are dedicated to fully following these policies:

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Responsibilities of Authors

Authorship should be given to researchers who genuinely completed the work or made a significant contribution. Primary authorship and other credits should fairly reflect the researcher’s specific scientific or professional achievements, regardless of their academic rank. Titles like department head do not automatically entitle someone to authorship. In exceptional cases like teacher-student research collaborations, the student should be the lead author of work based mainly on their thesis or dissertation. Faculty advisors should discuss publication credit with students early and as needed throughout the research and publication process. All authors and co-authors must sign an agreement on authorship.
The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are listed in the manuscript and that any who should not be included are excluded. They should also confirm that all co-authors have reviewed, approved, and consented to the final manuscript for submission. If any authors need to be added or removed, the Editorial Board will await a confirmation email from the corresponding author.
Authors should not submit or publish data already published as their original work. They should avoid submitting a new manuscript with the same theories, data, discussions, and conclusions as a previously published paper. This is like plagiarism but involves repeating the same data, images, and hypotheses in another publication instead of copying sentences. Submissions will be checked for plagiarism.
Authors should avoid publishing the same study in more than one journal or major publication. When submitting a manuscript, authors must confirm that their work is original and not under consideration by another journal. Publishing the same work in two journals is considered unethical and can have serious consequences. We urge authors to adhere to this policy to maintain the integrity of the publication process.
It is not ethical to cite one’s published work in later papers unless relevant. Self-citations are sometimes necessary when the author has published extensively in their field and the new publication continues from earlier work. However, authors should not stretch the scope of the current paper to cite their work unnecessarily.
Researchers should not withhold data from qualified professionals who want to reevaluate the findings if participant confidentiality is maintained and there are no legal restrictions on releasing the data. This does not prevent researchers from asking others to cover the costs of providing the data. Researchers who request data for reanalysis should use it only for that purpose and get written consent for any additional use.
Authors should honestly present their research results and assess their significance and impact objectively. The data should be accurately represented in the manuscript, with enough details and citations to allow others to reference the work. False or misleading statements are unacceptable and unethical.
Authors must ensure their work is completely original. If they use ideas or language from other sources, they must properly acknowledge or quote them. Researchers must maintain a similarity index of twenty percent (20%) or lower using Turnitin or similar plagiarism detection software.
It is crucial to credit others for their work. Authors should also cite works that have helped shape the topic being discussed.
Authors must disclose any affiliations or connections that could affect the study's results or interpretation, including any significant financial or other conflicts of interest. A disclosure form must be completed to list all funding sources for the project.
Authors must promptly report any significant errors or inconsistencies in their published work to the Editorial Board. The Board will then work with the author to decide whether to retract the paper or issue a correction.

Responsibilities of the Editors

The editor is responsible for deciding which articles to publish and for the content that appears in the journal. Decisions should be based on the journal's policies and standards. The editor may consult other editors or reviewers to make these decisions. To maintain academic integrity and prevent business interests from compromising ethical standards, the editor should be ready to issue corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
Manuscripts should be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit, regardless of the author's race, gender, sexuality, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political beliefs. Only the author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, and occasionally the editorial board, if necessary, should be aware of the manuscript being considered.
Manuscript details should be shared only with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
The editor should use the publishing connections to record and document complaints, such as data manipulation, text recycling, plagiarism, or research misconduct. The report should include detailed information about the situation, including who was involved, what happened, when and where, and why it is an issue. In plagiarism or content recycling cases, specific details about the texts or articles should be provided.
When considering retractions or revising published articles, the editor should follow the journal policies and guidelines for retracting articles.
The editor must not use unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for their research projects without the author's written consent. Information or ideas obtained through peer review should remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.
The editor must ensure that commercial interests, such as advertising or reprints, do not impact editorial decisions. The peer review process should be fair and impartial. Editors should avoid reviewing manuscripts with personal or financial connections to the authors or institutions. If a conflict of interest arises, the editor should have another editor or board member handle the review. Any undisclosed competing interests by contributors should be reported, and corrective actions like retractions or expressions of concern should be considered if necessary.
Editors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the published record by correcting and retracting work as needed. They should investigate any suspected research or publication misconduct, including editorial or reviewer behavior issues. The editor should address ethical concerns about submitted manuscripts or published work appropriately.

Responsibilities of the Reviewers

Peer review assists the editor in editing judgments and may help the author improve the text through editorial communication with the editor.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to evaluate the research presented in a submission or who understands that it will be impossible to complete the review promptly should notify the editor immediately so that substitute reviewers can be contacted.
Manuscripts submitted for consideration must be handled with confidentiality. Other than with the editor's permission, they cannot be displayed or discussed with others.
Reviews ought to be carried out impartially. It is unacceptable to criticize the author personally. Referees should clearly state their opinions and provide relevant justifications.
Reviewers should point out any pertinent published works that the authors have not cited. Any claim that a certain observation, deduction, or argument has already been recorded should be supported by the appropriate citation. Any significant overlap or resemblance between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data the reviewer knows of should be brought to the editor's notice.
Peer review-derived privileged knowledge or ideas must be kept secret and not used for one's gain. Reviewers should avoid considering manuscripts for which they have competing, cooperative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, businesses, or organizations associated with the submission.

Review Process

The review process is conducted objectively, accurately, and comprehensively. All submitted manuscripts will first undergo an initial review. Only those who pass this initial screening will proceed to a double-blind peer review. In this second stage, the identities of both the reviewers and the authors will remain anonymous.

Confidentiality

JIP values information privacy highly. Information about authors and reviewers, including their correspondences, will be shared only with the editors and editorial staff. Submitted manuscript details will be accessible only to editors, editorial staff, corresponding authors, and potential reviewers.

Correspondences and Notices

JIP will respond promptly to online communications from authors and reviewers. Once the review results are available, authors will be notified of the status of their manuscripts.

Dealing with Misconduct

Any instances of ethical misconduct are treated with utmost seriousness and will be handled according to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

Plagiarism and Data Accuracy

All relevant manuscripts are checked for authenticity using plagiarism detection software. If a manuscript is found to contain copied content or fails to cite existing work properly, its publication will be halted. Additionally, the editorial team manually verifies data accuracy.

Copyright

Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, authors must sign a copyright transfer agreement with the publisher as a condition for publication.

Open Access

JIP is an open-access journal. All published manuscripts are available to read and download from the JIP website. Authors and JIP must be credited appropriately according to the guidelines outlined in the following section.

Citing a JIP Article

When citing a JIP article using the American Psychological Association (APA) style, include the following in the bibliography entry: (1) the author's last name followed by their first and middle initials; (2) the publication year in parentheses; (3) the title of the article in sentence-case; (4) the journal name, Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives; (5) volume number; (6) issue number; (7) page numbers; and (8) DOI. For example:

Guevarra, S., Tayco, R., Tubog, M.V. (2024). Implementation of minimum health protocols for dine-in restaurants in Dumaguete City, Philippines. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 2(9), 6-15. https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0254