Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

(Aligned with COPE Best Practice Guidelines)

1. Editorial Board Responsibilities

A. Publication Decisions & Independence

The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board are solely responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal will be published. These decisions are driven entirely by the manuscript's academic merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

• Anti-Discrimination Policy: Submissions are evaluated without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

• Editorial Independence: Commercial, institutional, or sponsor interests will never influence editorial decisions.

B. Confidentiality

The editorial team must ensure that all materials submitted to the journal remain strictly confidential. No information about a submitted manuscript may be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.

C. Conflict of Interest Mitigation

Editors will recuse themselves from handling or reviewing any manuscript in which they have a competing, collaborative, or other conflicting financial or institutional interest.

2. Reviewer Responsibilities

A. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. Reviewers assist the editorial board in making decisions and provide constructive, objective feedback to help authors improve their work.

B. Promptness and Objectivity

• Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research or knows that a prompt review is impossible must notify the editor immediately and decline the invitation.

• Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their views clearly, supported by sound academic arguments.

C. Confidentiality & Misuse of Content

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviewers may not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author.

## 3. Author Responsibilities & Malpractice Prevention

To prevent legal issues, plagiarism, and retractions, authors must commit to the following:

A. Reporting Standards & Originality

Authors of original research papers should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately.

• Plagiarism: Plagiarism in all its forms (from passing off another’s paper as the author’s own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution) constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable. All manuscripts are screened using automated similarity-detection tools (e.g., Turnitin/iThenticate) upon submission.

B. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit a manuscript that describes essentially the same research to more than one journal concurrently. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is a severe breach of publishing ethics.

C. Authorship Criteria (ICMJE Standards)

Authorship must be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All individuals who made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission.

D. Disclosure of Funding and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must include a statement in the manuscript disclosing any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be clearly disclosed.

4. Dealing with Unethical Publishing Behavior

A. Identification of Misconduct

The editorial board, along with reviewers, will actively monitor for instances of scientific misconduct (including data fabrication, citation manipulation, and falsification). Anyone can report suspected misconduct to the editors at any time.

B. Investigation and Action (COPE Flowcharts)

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the editorial board will follow the official protocols established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE):

• Inquiry: The author will be contacted and given an opportunity to respond to the allegations.

• Correction/Errata: If an honest error is found, a formal correction note will be published.

• Retraction: If severe plagiarism, data fabrication, or dual-submission is proven, the journal will issue a formal retraction notice, and the article PDF will be watermarked as "RETRACTED."

Proactive Policy Suggestions for the Journal's Safety

To keep your journal running smoothly without operational hiccups, add these three operational policies to your backend system:

1. The "Right to Withdraw" Timeline Policy: * Rule: Authors can withdraw their manuscript free of charge at any time before it enters the peer-review stage. Once peer review has commenced, withdrawal is only permitted under exceptional circumstances to avoid wasting the voluntary time of global peer reviewers.

2. AI-Generated Content Policy: * Rule: Generative AI tools (like ChatGPT) cannot be listed as an author or co-author. If AI tools were used for data analysis or language polishing, authors must explicitly disclose this in the "Acknowledgments" or "Methods" section of the paper.

3. Preprint / Repository Harmony (Sherpa Romeo Green Status):

   • Rule: Explicitly state that posting a manuscript to an open-access preprint server (like arXiv, SSRN, or an institutional repository) prior to submission does not count as concurrent or duplicate publication. This attracts progressive researchers who value open science.