Commitment to Ethical Scholarly Publishing

Core Principles of Publication Ethics

✓ Reviewers should accept assignments only when they possess appropriate expertise and can complete the review within the requested period.

✓ Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be disclosed, discussed, reproduced or shared with unauthorised persons.

✓ Reviewer comments should be objective, constructive, evidence-based, respectful and directed towards improving the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

✓ Personal criticism, insulting remarks, discriminatory language or unsupported allegations against authors are unacceptable.

✓ Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest and decline an assignment when impartial evaluation may be affected.

✓ Unpublished data, arguments, interpretations or ideas obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, academic, professional or commercial advantage.

✓ Suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data manipulation, fabricated findings, inappropriate citation practices or other ethical concerns should be reported confidentially to the Editor.

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable. This includes direct copying without acknowledgement, substantial paraphrasing without attribution, unauthorised translation, misappropriation of ideas, improper reuse of images or data, and presenting another person’s work as original.

Manuscripts may be examined through plagiarism-detection or similarity-checking methods before or after peer review. Similarity reports are interpreted academically and contextually; an overall percentage alone does not determine whether misconduct has occurred.

When plagiarism or serious unattributed reproduction is confirmed, the manuscript may be rejected, removed from further consideration, corrected or retracted. The journal may also contact the authors’ institutions, funders or other relevant bodies when justified by the seriousness of the case.

Artificial intelligence systems and automated tools cannot be credited as authors because they cannot accept responsibility, approve the final manuscript, declare conflicts of interest or respond to questions concerning research integrity.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, interpretations and ethical compliance of all submitted content. Any substantial use of generative artificial intelligence or similar tools in preparing text, analysis, images, code or other research material should be transparently disclosed where relevant.

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, reviewer reports or unpublished data to external artificial-intelligence systems where confidentiality, ownership or data-protection safeguards cannot be assured.

✓ Research methods, procedures, observations and results must be reported accurately and with sufficient clarity to support scholarly evaluation.

✓ Data must not be fabricated, falsified, selectively manipulated or misrepresented.

✓ Images, graphs, tables and illustrations must not be misleadingly altered or presented outside their proper research context.

✓ Authors should retain relevant research records and may be requested to provide supporting information when necessary for editorial assessment or ethical investigation.

✓ Where legal, ethical and practical, authors are encouraged to provide transparent information regarding the availability and limitations of supporting data.

The following practices may constitute serious research or publication misconduct:

Other deceptive, coercive, fraudulent or misleading conduct that compromises the reliability of the research record or the independence of editorial assessment may also be treated as publication malpractice.

Research involving human participants, personal information, vulnerable groups, clinical material or identifiable records must comply with applicable ethical standards, institutional requirements and relevant legal provisions. Authors should obtain appropriate ethical approval and informed consent wherever required.

Privacy, dignity, confidentiality and anonymity must be protected. Identifying information should not be published unless its inclusion is essential, legally permissible and supported by informed consent.

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional and legal standards for humane treatment, ethical approval and responsible scientific use. Relevant approval information should be included in the manuscript where appropriate.

Authors, editors and reviewers must disclose relationships, circumstances or interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their judgment. Conflicts may be financial, personal, professional, academic, institutional, ideological or otherwise relevant to the submitted work.

The existence of a conflict does not automatically prevent publication or participation; however, transparent disclosure and appropriate editorial management are required to protect the fairness and credibility of the publication process.

Authors must not publish substantially the same research in more than one journal or submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously. Republishing previously published data, arguments, tables, figures or substantial text without appropriate disclosure and justification may constitute redundant or duplicate publication.

Secondary publication, translation or reuse may be considered only when legally and academically appropriate, transparently disclosed, properly referenced and approved by the relevant rights holders and editors.

Investigation of Alleged Misconduct

Authors, reviewers and readers may submit a reasoned complaint regarding editorial procedure, publication ethics or a published article through the official contact details provided on the journal website. Complaints should include sufficient factual information and supporting evidence to permit proper assessment.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a material factual error, procedural irregularity or significant misunderstanding affected the outcome. An appeal must present clear academic reasons and should not merely express disagreement with reviewer recommendations.

Appeals and complaints will be considered objectively. When appropriate, the matter may be reviewed by an editor or independent expert who was not directly responsible for the original decision.

✓ The publisher shall support editorial independence and shall not interfere improperly with manuscript decisions.

✓ The publisher shall support fair peer review, transparent editorial policies and reasonable measures for maintaining the integrity of the published record.

✓ Commercial considerations, sponsorship or advertising must not determine editorial decisions or compromise academic standards.

✓ The publisher shall cooperate with editors in addressing ethical complaints, corrections, retractions, legal concerns and preservation of journal content.

Commitment to the Integrity of the Scholarly Record