Statement of publication ethics and publication malpractice
To ensure the quality and credibility of the peer-reviewed scholarly publication, it is essential for all stake holders: the authors, the journal editors, the reviewers and publishers, to agree upon a set of standards and codes of behaviors. The following ethics statements for the Journal of Library and Information Science Research (JLISR) are based on the guidelines published by Committee on Publication Ethics’ (COPE).
Duties of Authors
Authors who report original research should strive to present an accurate account of the procedures performed as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the results. The submission should also contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly misleading statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
DATA ACCESS AND RETENTION
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data based on which a published work was prepared. They should also be prepared to provide public access to their data therefore the data should be retained for a reasonable time after publication.
ORIGINALITY AND PLAGIARISM
The authors should ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere; all the works or words by others should be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
MULTIPLE, REDUNDANT OR CONCURRENT SUBMISSION
The authors should not submit manuscripts reporting essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SOURCES
The authors should always give proper acknowledgement of the work of others. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
AUTHORSHIP OF A MANUSCRIPT
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study reported. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have also contributed in certain substantive aspects of the research the author wish to express gratitude should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
The corresponding authors should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. All co-authors must be clearly indicated as of the moment of manuscript submission. Adding co-authors at a later stage will not be accepted.
DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research should be disclosed at the earliest stage of reviewing process possible.
FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS IN PUBLISHED WORKS
When the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
HAZARDS AND HUMAN OR ANIMAL SUBJECTS
The authors should clearly identify the use of potentially dangerous chemicals, procedures or equipment in their research. If the research involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee has approved them. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be preserved.
Duties of the Editors-in-Chief
The editor of the journal is responsible for choosing which of the manuscripts submitted should be published. The decision should be decided by the validation of the work and its importance to the readership of this journal. The editor may confer with other members of the board of editors or reviewers in making this decision.
The editor should evaluate the manuscript for their intellectual merits without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political belief of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding authors, reviewers, reviewer candidates, other members of the editorial board, and the publisher, as appropriate.
DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editor’s own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should assign another member of the editorial board) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships.
Duties of peer reviewers
CONTRIBUTION TO EDITORIAL DECISIONS
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the authors, may assist the author in improving the manuscript.
Invited referees who feel unqualified to review the manuscript or know that they will not be able to complete the review promptly should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with to others except as authorized by the editor.
STANDARDS OF OBJECTIVITY
The review should perform the review objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views and comments in a clear and constructive manner with appropriate supporting arguments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SOURCES
One of the duties of the reviewers is to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement indicating that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the corresponding citation. The reviewer should also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and any other published papers.
DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.