Ethics Policy

Our journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in academic publishing. We adhere strictly to the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and expect all participants in the publication process—authors, reviewers, and editors—to uphold these ethical standards.

This Ethics Policy outlines the responsibilities and expectations for all parties involved in the publication process and details how the journal addresses allegations of misconduct, conflicts of interest, and other ethical concerns.

  1. Duties of Authors

1.1 Originality and Plagiarism

  • Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and properly cites the work of others.
  • Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unattributed use of others' work, is strictly prohibited.
  • All submissions are screened for plagiarism using appropriate detection software.

1.2 Authorship and Acknowledgement

  • Authorship should be based on substantial contributions to the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the study.
  • All authors should be listed, and any contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.
  • Changes to authorship after submission require agreement from all authors and must be approved by the editorial office.

1.3 Data Integrity and Transparency

  • Authors must present accurate and reliable data and ensure that the data is appropriately analyzed and interpreted.
  • Data fabrication, falsification, and manipulation are considered unethical and will result in manuscript rejection or retraction.
  • Authors are encouraged to deposit raw data in publicly accessible repositories and provide a Data Availability Statement outlining where and how the data can be accessed.

1.4 Conflict of Interest Disclosure

  • Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest that may influence the research or its interpretation.
  • Failure to disclose conflicts of interest may lead to rejection, retraction, or other corrective actions.

1.5 Ethical Approval for Human and Animal Research

  • Research involving human participants must be conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki and receive prior approval from an appropriate ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB).
  • Studies involving animals must comply with relevant guidelines and obtain prior ethical approval.
  • Authors should include an Ethics Statement detailing approval from the relevant committee and evidence of informed consent (if applicable).
  1. Duties of Editors

2.1 Editorial Independence and Objectivity

  • The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team operate independently and make decisions based on the scientific merit, originality, and relevance of the submitted manuscripts.
  • Editorial decisions are free from commercial or political influence, and the editorial team ensures that all decisions are made in the best interest of the scientific community.

2.2 Fairness and Confidentiality

  • Editors ensure that all manuscripts are evaluated without regard to the author’s race, gender, nationality, institutional affiliation, or personal characteristics.
  • Manuscripts are handled with the utmost confidentiality throughout the review and decision-making process.

2.3 Handling Allegations of Misconduct

  • Editors follow COPE’s Flowcharts and Guidelines to investigate and address allegations of misconduct, including:
    • Plagiarism, data fabrication, and falsification
    • Duplicate publication or redundant submissions
    • Authorship disputes and conflicts of interest
  • Misconduct investigations may result in correction, retraction, or reporting to the author’s institution or funder.
  1. Duties of Reviewers

3.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

  • Reviewers provide constructive, objective, and timely feedback to assist the editorial team in making informed decisions.
  • Reviews should focus on the manuscript’s originality, methodology, clarity, and ethical rigor.

3.2 Confidentiality and Anonymity

  • Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and review process.
  • Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use unpublished information from the manuscript without prior permission.

3.3 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

  • Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that may compromise their impartiality and decline to review manuscripts where conflicts exist.
  • If a reviewer recognizes a conflict after accepting a review, they must immediately notify the editorial office and withdraw from the review process.

3.4 Ethical Considerations

  • Reviewers should be vigilant about identifying potential ethical concerns such as plagiarism, unethical research practices, or data manipulation.
  • Any concerns regarding the ethical conduct of the research should be reported to the editorial office.
  1. Conflicts of Interest

4.1 For Authors

  • Authors must declare all potential conflicts of interest during the submission process, including:
    • Financial ties (e.g., funding sources, grants, or consultancy fees)
    • Institutional affiliations that may influence the research
    • Personal relationships that could bias interpretation of results

4.2 For Reviewers

  • Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where conflicts of interest may affect their impartiality.
  • If conflicts arise after accepting a review, reviewers must notify the editorial office immediately.

4.3 For Editors

  • Editors are required to recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist.
  • In cases where an editor has a conflict of interest, the manuscript will be reassigned to an independent editor.
  1. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

5.1 Investigating Misconduct

  • All allegations of research and publication misconduct will be investigated following COPE’s Core Practices and Flowcharts.
  • Misconduct may include:
    • Plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification
    • Manipulation of peer review or unethical research practices
    • Failure to disclose conflicts of interest

5.2 Corrective Actions

  • In cases where misconduct is proven, the journal may take the following corrective actions:
    • Corrections: Minor errors that do not affect the validity of the research will be corrected through a corrigendum.
    • Retractions: Articles will be retracted if ethical breaches or errors compromise the study’s integrity. A retraction notice will explain the reason for the decision.
    • Expressions of Concern: When questions about the validity of a study arise but further investigation is required, an expression of concern may be issued.
  1. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

6.1 Compliance with COPE Guidelines

  • The journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for editors and publishers.
  • Any suspected ethical breaches will be handled according to COPE’s established protocols.

6.2 Editorial Oversight and Transparency

  • The editorial team ensures that all decisions are transparent, consistent, and aligned with the journal’s ethical standards.
  • Publication decisions are not influenced by commercial interests or political considerations.
  1. Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern

7.1 Corrections

  • Minor errors that do not affect the conclusions of a study will be corrected through a corrigendum.

7.2 Retractions

  • Articles may be retracted for ethical violations, significant errors, or concerns regarding the validity of the study.
  • Retractions are accompanied by a notice that clearly explains the reason for the action.

7.3 Expressions of Concern

  • When there is uncertainty about the integrity of a published article but insufficient evidence for retraction, the journal may issue an expression of concern while the matter is investigated.
  1. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Statement
  • The journal is committed to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion in its editorial processes and encourages submissions from researchers of all backgrounds.
  • We actively promote the inclusion of underrepresented voices in our editorial board, peer review processes, and published content.
  1. Appeals and Complaints

9.1 Appeals Process

  • Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a detailed explanation and justification.
  • Appeals will be reviewed by an independent editor or senior member of the editorial board.

9.2 Complaints Mechanism

  • Complaints regarding editorial processes, publication ethics, or misconduct may be submitted to the editorial office.
  • Complaints will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and resolved transparently.
  1. Contact Information
  • For inquiries or concerns related to the journal’s ethics policies, please contact:
    • Editorial Office Email: admin@jiips.co.uk