ETHICAL PRINCIPLES AND PUBLICATION ETHICS POLICY
- Purpose and Basis
The Journal of Business Research–Turk considers it essential that scholarly publishing processes be conducted in accordance with the principles of integrity, impartiality, transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the scholarly record. The Journal’s Publication Ethics Policy covers the ethical duties and responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, Field Editors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, and the publisher.
In its publication ethics practices, the Journal uses the core practices, guidelines, and flowcharts developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as the “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing” published by DOAJ, as guiding resources. This statement does not imply that the Journal is a member of COPE.
This policy applies to all stages of submission, preliminary assessment, peer review, editorial decision-making, publication, and post-publication. Special issues, invited articles, and all other scholarly content are subject to the same ethical principles.
- Fundamental Principles of Publication Ethics
The Journal of Business Research–Turk adopts the following fundamental principles:
- Academic integrity and the integrity of the scholarly record
• Editorial independence and impartiality
• Double-blind peer review
• Confidentiality of author, reviewer, and editor information
• Protection of research participants’ rights
• Transparent authorship and contribution statements
• Disclosure and management of conflicts of interest
• Accurate and honest reporting of data, methods, and findings
• Respect for intellectual property and copyright
• Impartial investigation of allegations of ethical misconduct
• Timely correction of inaccurate scholarly records
• Equality, diversity, and inclusion
• Independence of publication decisions from financial, commercial, political, and personal influences
Editorial decisions are based solely on the manuscript’s scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, contribution to the Journal’s aims and scope, and clarity of presentation. Authors’ nationality, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious or political views, institutional affiliation, academic title, or similar personal characteristics must not influence editorial decisions.
- Authors’ Ethical Responsibilities
Authors submitting work to the Journal of Business Research–Turk must comply with the following ethical responsibilities.
3.1. Originality
Submitted work must be original and make a clear contribution to the scholarly literature. When authors use other sources, they must cite those sources accurately and completely.
Using text, ideas, methods, data, tables, figures, or images from other sources without appropriate attribution constitutes plagiarism. Translating and using a text published in another language without citing the original source also constitutes plagiarism.
Material reproduced from an author’s previous work must also be appropriately cited. Reusing substantial portions of a previous work without making a new and original contribution is considered text recycling or self-plagiarism.
3.2. Simultaneous Submission and Duplicate Publication
A manuscript may not be under consideration by more than one journal simultaneously. Work that has been published or accepted for publication by another journal may not be submitted to the Journal of Business Research–Turk.
If the submitted work is derived from a thesis, conference paper, project, preprint, or previously disclosed research report, this must be stated on the title page. The previous work must be appropriately cited, and the editor must be informed, where necessary, of how the manuscript differs from the earlier version.
Dividing the results of a single study into multiple articles without scientific justification is considered “salami slicing” and is not permitted.
3.3. Accuracy of Data and Findings
Authors must report research data accurately, completely, and without misleading readers. The following practices are considered serious ethical misconduct:
- Fabricating data or findings not based on any research
• Altering or falsifying research data
• Excluding observations or variables without justification to obtain a desired result
• Selectively reporting findings
• Presenting statistical analyses in a misleading manner
• Manipulating images, tables, or figures in a way that alters their scientific meaning
• Altering ethics committee documents, participant information, or research records
• Using fabricated participants, data, or documents
Authors must comply with applicable legislation, ethics committee decisions, assurances given to participants, and personal data protection principles when collecting, storing, processing, and sharing data.
3.4. Retention and Provision of Raw Data
During the evaluation process or after publication, the Editorial Office may ask authors to provide anonymized raw data, analytical code, data-collection instruments, or other research records to verify the research.
Subject to ethical and legal restrictions, authors must be prepared to provide these materials to the Editorial Office. If the data cannot be shared because of confidentiality, personal data protection, trade secrets, or ethics committee requirements, the restriction must be clearly justified.
3.5. Authorship Criteria
Individuals identified as authors must have made a substantial scholarly contribution to the work, approved the final version of the manuscript, and accepted an appropriate degree of responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the work.
Authorship requires at least one of the following contributions, together with participation in drafting the manuscript or critically reviewing it:
- Conceptualization of the research
• Development of the research methodology
• Data collection or conduct of the research
• Analysis and interpretation of the data
• Drafting of the manuscript
• Critical review of the manuscript’s scientific content
Providing funding, administrative support, general supervision, language editing, or technical assistance alone is insufficient to qualify for authorship. Such contributions should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section where appropriate.
Ghost authorship, gift authorship, and honorary authorship are not permitted.
3.6. Disclosure of Author Contributions
In multi-authored studies, each author’s contribution must be disclosed in accordance with the CRediT Taxonomy. The contribution statement must be provided on the title page and published at the end of the accepted article.
All authors must approve the submission, order of authors, contribution statement, and final version of the manuscript.
3.7. Changes in Authorship
After the evaluation process has begun, requests to add or remove an author or change the order of authors may be considered only under the following conditions:
- The request is submitted with a reasoned explanation.
• Written consent is obtained from all authors.
• Written consent is obtained from the individual being added or removed.
• The proposed change complies with the authorship criteria.
• An updated author contribution statement is provided.
After a manuscript has been accepted, changes in authorship are permitted only in exceptional and documented circumstances. The Editorial Office does not act as an adjudicator or mediator in disputes between authors and may request an investigation by the authors’ institutions where necessary.
3.8. Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that could influence the research or its interpretation.
The absence of any conflict of interest must also be explicitly declared. The declaration must be provided on the title page and published at the end of the accepted article.
3.9. Funding and Support
Financial or institutional support provided for the research must be disclosed together with the name of the funding organization, project or grant number, and the funder’s role in the research.
If no financial support was received, this must also be explicitly stated. The source of funding must not influence the editorial decision.
3.10. Ethics Committee Approval
Research involving the collection of primary data from human participants through surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, experiments, or similar methods must receive approval from an authorized ethics committee before data collection begins.
The name of the ethics committee, the date of its decision, and the decision or reference number must be stated in the Methods section, and the ethics committee document must be uploaded to the submission system. Retrospective ethics committee approval obtained after the research has been completed is not accepted.
For secondary-data research that does not require ethics committee approval, the nature and source of the data and the reasons why ethics committee approval was not required must be explained with appropriate justification in the Methods section.
3.11. Informed Consent
In research involving human participants, participants must be provided with adequate information about:
- The purpose and scope of the research
• The voluntary nature of participation
• Their right to withdraw from the research at any time
• The purposes for which the data will be used
• Confidentiality and personal data protection
• Potential risks and benefits of the research
• The possible use of the results in scholarly publications
Written or otherwise verifiable informed consent appropriate to the nature of the research must be obtained from participants. For children and individuals with limited decision-making capacity, permission from a parent or legal guardian and, where possible, the participant’s assent must be obtained in accordance with applicable legislation and the ethics committee’s decision.
Separate consent for publication may be required for identifiable personal information, photographs, images, audio recordings, or case details. Data must be anonymized to the greatest extent possible.
3.12. Reporting Errors
Authors must notify the Editorial Office without delay if they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a manuscript under evaluation or in a published article.
Authors must cooperate with the Editorial Office in relation to corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or any other necessary post-publication actions.
- Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
Generative artificial intelligence systems may not be identified as authors or co-authors. Such systems cannot assume scientific responsibility, disclose conflicts of interest, or approve publishing agreements.
If authors have used generative artificial intelligence tools in preparing their scholarly work, they must disclose:
- The name and version of the tool used
• The date of use
• The purpose for which it was used
• The stage of the research or writing process in which it was used
• How the generated content was checked
• The extent of human oversight
Authors are responsible for verifying the accuracy, originality, sources, compliance with intellectual property rights, and scientific reliability of all content generated by artificial intelligence. References generated by artificial intelligence may not be used without verification.
Confidential, personal, sensitive, or unauthorized data must not be uploaded to artificial intelligence systems.
Disclosure is not required for standard tools used solely for spelling, grammar, and formatting checks. However, use must be disclosed if a tool generates new content, substantially rewrites text, performs data analysis, generates code, or creates images.
- Editors’ Ethical Duties and Responsibilities
5.1. Editorial Independence
Editors make decisions according to scientific and ethical criteria, independently of the publisher and Journal owner. No commercial, financial, political, institutional, or personal interest may influence an editorial decision.
The publisher may not interfere with editors’ scientific decisions. The relationship between the Editorial Office and the publisher is based on the principle of editorial independence.
5.2. Impartiality and Equality
Editors evaluate submitted work independently of the authors’ identities and personal characteristics. Decisions are based on the manuscript’s:
- Alignment with the Journal’s aims and scope
• Originality
• Scientific contribution
• Theoretical adequacy
• Methodological rigor
• Ethical compliance
• Validity of findings
• Clarity of presentation
5.3. Editorial Decisions
Reviewer opinions constitute scientific advice for editorial decision-making. The final decision rests with the editor.
The editor considers the peer-review reports, scientific quality of the research, ethical compliance, the Journal’s aims and scope, and the integrity of the scholarly record together. If the editor reaches a decision that differs from the reviewers’ recommendations, the decision must be based on scientific or ethical grounds.
5.4. Confidentiality
Editors and Editorial Board members may share information concerning submitted manuscripts only with individuals directly involved in the evaluation process.
Information, data, methods, and ideas contained in unpublished manuscripts may not be used for personal research or other purposes without the authors’ written permission.
Editors may not upload unpublished manuscripts to publicly accessible generative artificial intelligence systems or systems whose data-retention conditions are unclear.
5.5. Management of Conflicts of Interest
An editor must withdraw from the evaluation of a manuscript involving a conflict of interest concerning the editor or a person with whom the editor has a close relationship. The manuscript must be handled by another editor who has no conflict of interest.
Editors must consider institutional, financial, professional, or personal relationships between authors and reviewers and safeguard the independence of the evaluation process.
5.6. Manuscripts Submitted by Editors and Editorial Board Members
Submission of a manuscript to the Journal by an editor or Editorial Board member does not provide the manuscript with any privilege.
The evaluation of such work is handled by an independent editor who has no conflict of interest, in a manner that prevents the author from accessing or influencing the process. The published article includes a statement confirming that the evaluation process was conducted independently.
5.7. Selection of Reviewers
Editors must:
- Select reviewers with expertise appropriate to the manuscript’s subject matter and methodology.
• Assess potential conflicts of interest involving reviewers.
• Provide reviewers with clear evaluation criteria.
• Protect reviewers’ identities under the double-blind peer-review model.
• Prevent biased, abusive, or unscientific reports from being communicated to authors.
• Evaluate reviewer performance in terms of quality, impartiality, and timely completion.
• Improve the scientific, institutional, and geographical diversity of the reviewer pool.
5.8. Oversight of Research Ethics
Editors oversee compliance with human rights, personal data protection requirements, ethics committee decisions, and applicable legislation.
Studies requiring ethics committee approval or informed consent that lack the required documentation are not taken forward for scientific evaluation, or their evaluation is terminated.
5.9. Integrity of the Scholarly Record
The primary responsibility of editors is to protect the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record. When a significant error or ethical concern is identified in a published work, editors must not delay the necessary corrective action out of concern for the reputation of the authors or their institutions.
- Reviewers’ Ethical Responsibilities
The Journal of Business Research–Turk operates a double-blind peer-review process. Reviewers must comply with the following ethical responsibilities.
6.1. Expertise and Competence
Reviewers should accept only manuscripts that fall within their areas of expertise and that they are capable of evaluating to an appropriate scholarly standard. If reviewers believe that they are not qualified to evaluate particular parts of a manuscript, they must inform the editor.
6.2. Impartiality
Reviewers must base their evaluations on the scientific content of the work. The authors’ identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, religious or political views, or commercial considerations must not influence the evaluation.
6.3. Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat manuscripts sent to them for evaluation as confidential documents. They may not share manuscripts with third parties, communicate directly with the authors, or use unpublished information in their own work.
Reviewers may not upload the manuscript, in whole or in part, to publicly accessible generative artificial intelligence systems or systems whose data-retention conditions are unclear.
6.4. Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must decline an invitation to review and notify the editor if they have a financial, institutional, professional, or personal conflict of interest involving the authors, the subject matter of the study, or its funding sources.
6.5. Quality of the Evaluation
Peer-review reports must:
- Be scientific and objective,
• Be based on clear reasoning,
• Include constructive recommendations,
• Be written in courteous and professional language,
• Not target the author personally, and
• Not contain insulting, threatening, or derogatory statements.
Reviewers may evaluate the sources used in the manuscript and the relationship between the research and the literature. However, they must not request unnecessary citations to their own work or to a particular journal.
6.6. Compliance with Deadlines
Reviewers must complete their evaluations within the specified period. If reviewers realize that they cannot complete the evaluation on time, they must notify the editor without delay and withdraw from the assignment where necessary.
6.7. Suspected Ethical Misconduct
If reviewers suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, ethics committee irregularities, citation manipulation, or other ethical misconduct, they must report their concerns and supporting evidence confidentially and exclusively to the editor.
- Ethical Responsibilities of the Editorial Board
Editorial Board members must:
- Act in accordance with the Journal’s publishing and ethics policies.
• Protect editorial independence.
• Maintain the confidentiality of information communicated to them.
• Disclose conflicts of interest.
• Make scholarly contributions to the Journal within their areas of expertise.
• Not attempt to influence editorial decisions for personal or institutional benefit.
• Contribute to the Journal’s quality, diversity, and internationalization objectives.
The names, academic titles, affiliations, and countries of Editorial Board members are published and kept up to date on the Journal’s website. Individuals appointed to the Editorial Board must have agreed to serve as members.
- Publisher’s Ethical Responsibilities
The publisher:
- Guarantees editorial independence.
• Does not interfere with editors’ scientific decisions.
• Provides the technical and administrative infrastructure required for the Journal’s publishing processes.
• Supports long-term access to and digital preservation of published content.
• Ensures that necessary measures are implemented against ethical misconduct, plagiarism, citation manipulation, and peer-review manipulation.
• Does not permit commercial or financial relationships to influence editorial decisions.
• Preserves article versions and publication records.
• Supports the publication of corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern where necessary.
• Transparently discloses the Journal’s revenue sources and fee policy.
• Implements the measures necessary to protect personal data and system security.
Copyright in articles remains with the authors. The Journal does not require authors to transfer copyright. Authors grant the Journal a non-exclusive licence to publish the article for the first time and distribute it on an open-access basis.
- Conflicts of Interest Policy
Authors, reviewers, editors, Editorial Board members, and the publisher must disclose financial and non-financial conflicts of interest that could influence, or reasonably be perceived as influencing, the scientific evaluation.
Conflicts of interest may include:
- Financial relationships
• Consultancy or employment relationships
• A history of joint projects or publications
• Employment at the same institution
• Close personal or professional relationships
• Academic rivalry
• Political, ideological, or institutional affiliations
• The possibility of directly benefiting from the research outcome
The existence of a conflict of interest does not automatically require rejection of a manuscript. What is essential is that the relationship is disclosed and the process is managed independently.
- Conduct Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics
The following practices are considered ethical misconduct:
10.1. Plagiarism
Using another person’s ideas, methods, data, text, tables, figures, or images without appropriate attribution.
10.2. Data Fabrication
Producing data or findings based on research that was not actually conducted.
10.3. Data Falsification
Altering, omitting, or selectively presenting research data, records, or results in a manner that changes the true meaning of the research.
10.4. Duplicate Publication
Publishing the same or substantially similar work in more than one venue without the necessary disclosure and citation.
10.5. Salami Slicing
Dividing the results of a single study into multiple publications without scientific justification.
10.6. Improper Authorship
Identifying individuals who have not made sufficient contributions as authors or excluding individuals who have made substantial contributions from the author list.
10.7. Citation Manipulation
Requests by an author, reviewer, or editor for citations that lack scientific justification; artificially increasing citations to the Journal; or participating in reciprocal citation arrangements.
10.8. Peer-Review Manipulation
Creating a false reviewer identity or account, providing email addresses controlled by an author as reviewer contact details, or participating in organized attempts to manipulate the peer-review process.
10.9. Alteration of Ethics Documentation
Fabricating or altering ethics committee approval, participant consent, research authorization, data-use permission, or other official documentation.
10.10. Breach of Confidentiality
Unauthorized sharing or use of unpublished information and materials obtained during peer review or editorial evaluation.
- Similarity and Plagiarism Screening
Submissions to the Journal may be examined using reliable similarity-detection software at appropriate stages of the evaluation process.
The similarity percentage alone does not constitute evidence of ethical misconduct or a criterion for rejection. The Editorial Office evaluates the following contextually:
- The source of the similarity
• Whether quotations have been appropriately identified
• Standard methodological expressions
• Material reproduced from the authors’ previous work
• Translations made without attribution
• Text recycling
• The sections of the manuscript in which the similarity is concentrated
If ethical misconduct is identified, the manuscript may be rejected. If the issue is identified after publication, a correction, expression of concern, or retraction process may be initiated.
- Investigation of Allegations of Ethical Misconduct
The Journal takes allegations of ethical misconduct relating to submitted or published work seriously. Allegations may be raised before or after publication.
Reports of suspected ethical misconduct should, where possible, include:
- The title and DOI of the article concerned
• A clear description of the allegation
• Documents or evidence supporting the allegation
• Comparative text, data, or images, where available
• The reporting person’s contact information
Anonymous reports are not rejected solely because the identity of the reporting person has not been disclosed. They are evaluated according to the adequacy of the evidence and the seriousness of the allegation.
During the investigation process:
- The allegation and supporting evidence undergo preliminary assessment by the Editorial Office.
- Any editor or Board member with a conflict of interest withdraws from the process.
- Explanations and documentation are requested from the authors where necessary.
- An independent expert opinion may be obtained where appropriate.
- Allegations of research misconduct that exceed the Journal’s authority may be referred to the author’s institution, the relevant ethics committee, or another appropriate organization.
- The confidentiality of the relevant parties is protected during the investigation.
- Editorial action is taken on the basis of the findings.
- If the published scholarly record requires correction, an appropriate notice is issued.
The Journal is not an investigative authority empowered to impose criminal or disciplinary sanctions. Its primary duty is to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. Institutional disciplinary proceedings and investigations of research misconduct are the responsibility of the relevant institutions.
- Complaints and Appeals Policy
Authors, reviewers, and readers may submit complaints concerning the editorial process, publication decisions, ethical practices, reviewer conduct, or the operation of the Journal.
Authors may submit a reasoned appeal against an editorial decision within a reasonable period after receiving notification of the decision. An appeal must not be based merely on dissatisfaction with the decision; it must present specific scientific, methodological, ethical, or procedural grounds.
Complaints and appeals are evaluated according to the following principles:
- The submission must be made in writing and include reasons.
• The relevant manuscript and decision details must be provided.
• The editor who made the original decision may not independently conduct the final review of an appeal against that decision.
• Where necessary, the submission is reviewed by another editor or an independent committee with no conflict of interest.
• Additional information and documentation may be requested from the parties.
• The applicant is notified of the outcome together with the reasons for the decision.
• A scientific evaluation outcome may be changed only where a significant error, procedural irregularity, or overlooked scientific evidence is identified.
- Corrections, Retractions, and Updates to the Scholarly Record
The Journal considers it essential that the published scholarly record remain permanent, accessible, and accurate.
14.1. Corrections
A correction is published when a significant error is identified that affects the accuracy of the scholarly record but does not invalidate the article’s overall conclusions. The correction notice is linked to the original article, and the original article is linked to the correction notice.
14.2. Retractions
An article may be retracted in the following circumstances:
- A significant error demonstrating that the findings are unreliable
• Data fabrication or falsification
• Serious plagiarism
• Duplicate publication
• A serious breach concerning ethics committee approval or informed consent
• Unauthorized use of data or materials
• Unlawful content or conduct
• Manipulation of the peer-review process
• Other ethical misconduct that invalidates the scientific reliability of the article
The purpose of retraction is not to punish authors but to protect the integrity of the scholarly literature by clearly identifying inaccurate or unreliable content.
The bibliographic record of a retracted article is preserved, but every page is marked to indicate that the article has been retracted. The retraction notice is freely accessible and explains the reason for the retraction.
14.3. Expressions of Concern
An expression of concern may be published temporarily when an investigation into a serious ethical or scientific issue has not been concluded or when an institutional investigation is taking an extended period.
14.4. Removal of Published Content
Complete removal of an article from the Journal’s website is considered only in exceptional circumstances, such as a court order, a serious risk to personal safety, unlawful content, or circumstances in which failure to remove the content would cause severe harm. The bibliographic record and the reason for removal are preserved to the greatest extent possible.
- Post-Publication Discussion
Readers may submit scholarly criticism, comments, or requests for correction concerning published work. Scientific and evidence-based submissions are evaluated by the Editorial Office.
Where necessary, the authors of the article are given an opportunity to respond. A letter to the editor, author response, correction, editorial note, or another form of post-publication notice may be published.
Criticism must not contain personal attacks, insults, or allegations lacking a scientific basis.
- Data Sharing and Reproducibility
Every article must include a data availability statement. Authors must disclose the accessibility status of research data, analytical code, data-collection instruments, and other supporting materials.
Where data can be shared, reliable data repositories and persistent identifiers should be used. Where data cannot be shared, the ethical, legal, commercial, or confidentiality-based restrictions must be explained.
The inability to share data does not, by itself, constitute grounds for rejection. Authors must, however, explain the reasons why the data cannot be shared in a transparent and verifiable manner.
- Intellectual Property, Copyright, and Licensing
Authors are responsible for obtaining the necessary permissions for third-party text, tables, figures, scales, photographs, and other materials used in their articles.
Copyright in articles published by the Journal remains with the authors. Copyright is not transferred to the Journal. Authors grant the Journal a non-exclusive licence to publish the article for the first time, distribute and archive it, and submit it to academic indexes.
Unless explicitly stated otherwise, articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) Licence.
Allegations of plagiarism, unauthorized use of materials, and copyright infringement are investigated by the Editorial Office. Where necessary, authors are asked to provide documentation of permission, and action is initiated to correct the scholarly record.
- Citation Ethics
Citations must be based on scientific necessity and direct relevance to the work.
Authors must not:
- Cite sources they have not read.
• Use irrelevant sources to increase citation counts.
• Attempt to increase artificially the citation count of a person, institution, or journal.
• Use retracted publications without indicating their retracted status.
• Use a secondary source in a manner that suggests they directly consulted the primary source.
Editors and reviewers may ask authors to include only citations that are necessary and directly relevant to improving the scientific quality of the manuscript.
- Special Issues and Guest Editors
Special issues and manuscripts managed by Guest Editors are subject to the Journal’s ordinary ethical and scientific standards.
Guest Editors must:
- Comply with the Journal’s editorial policies.
• Disclose conflicts of interest.
• Protect the independence of the peer-review process.
• Ensure that manuscripts undergo scientific and ethical evaluation.
• Withdraw from the evaluation of their own work or work authored by individuals with whom they have close relationships.
Articles submitted to special issues may not be subjected to a lower evaluation standard than articles submitted to regular issues. Final editorial responsibility rests with the Journal’s Editor-in-Chief.
- Confidentiality and Protection of Personal Data
The Journal processes personal data relating to authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and research participants solely for the purposes of conducting scholarly publishing processes and in accordance with applicable legislation.
Personal data are not shared with unauthorized individuals. Names, email addresses, institutional affiliations, ORCID iDs, and similar information collected through the manuscript management system may not be used for purposes other than those specified by the Journal.
Authors must remove unnecessary details that could reveal participants’ identities and anonymize data to the greatest extent possible.
- Reporting Ethical Misconduct
The Editorial Office may be contacted regarding unethical conduct, research misconduct, plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, conflicts of interest, peer-review manipulation, or other ethical concerns involving work published by or under evaluation at the Journal of Business Research–Turk.
Reports should be submitted to:
Email: dergi@isarder.org
Information and documentation explaining the allegation should be presented as clearly as possible. The Journal protects the confidentiality of individuals who submit reports in good faith. Retaliation against individuals who report ethical concerns is not permitted.
- Policy Updates
This Ethical Principles and Publication Ethics Policy is reviewed regularly in light of international publishing standards, COPE guidelines, DOAJ criteria, applicable legislation, and developments in the Journal’s editorial practices.
The policy version number and date of the most recent update are displayed on the Journal’s website. Policy changes are not applied retroactively to the detriment of authors.
