Publication Ethics | Open Access Policy | Publication & Peer Review Policy | Editorial Process

Publication Ethics

The Innovare Academic Sciences (IAS) journals are dedicated to maintaining the highest reliability in the content published. To maintain high ethical standards of publication, the publisher strives to work closely with journal editors, authors and peer-reviewers. IAS follows the ethics statement primarily from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct Guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org  and uses its ethics to deal with acts of publication misconduct, thereby examining allegations of misconduct to ensure the reliability of research. In addition, IAS Medical journals follow the International Committee for Medical Journal Editor (ICMJE) guidelines (http://www.icmje.org/) and World Association of Medical Editors WAME guidelines (https://www.wame.org/).
The following policies apply to the journals published by Innovare Academic Sciences Pvt Ltd. Please read these policies in full before submitting your article to ensure you have correctly followed all the requirements.

PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism is the unethical act of copying when somebody presents the work of others (ideas, processes, results or words, data, or theories) as if they were their own and without proper acknowledgment. Plagiarism is one of the biggest problems in journal publications that afflict science communication. Self-plagiarism is when an author utilizes a large part of their previously published work without appropriate references. In the case of plagiarism, the same manuscript publishes in multiple journals by doing minor modifications in previously published manuscripts with few new data.

Types of Plagiarism

IAS considers the following types of plagiarism:

• Full Plagiarism: Previously published content without changes to the text, idea, and grammar is considered full plagiarism. It involves presenting exact text from a source as one’s own.
• Partial Plagiarism: If the content is a mixture of multiple sources, where the author has extensively rephrased text, it is known as partial plagiarism.
• Self-Plagiarism: When an author reuses complete or portions of their pre-published research, it is known as self-plagiarism. Complete self-plagiarism is a case when an author republishes their own previously published work in a new journal.

IAS Plagiarism Policy

The IAS journals strictly follow COPE guidelines for plagiarism against any unethical act of copying or plagiarism in any form. Furthermore, IAS publication respects intellectual property and aims to protect and promote its author’s original work.
Authors submitting articles to IAS journals are expected to abide by ethical standards and abstain from plagiarism in any form.

All manuscripts submitted for IAS journals are cross-checked using the software Grammarly for plagiarism. At the initial stage of review by the editor and reviewer, if manuscripts are found to be plagiarized, outright rejected and not considered for publication in the journals. If it shows plagiarism of less than 20%, then asked from the author to correct it and make it free from plagiarism. If the author submits the updated article, it is again checked by the editor and if it is correct, then only it is considered for publication. At last, plagiarism is re-checked and considered for publication at the time of galley proof.

After publication, if any reader complain for a manuscript is found to be plagiarized, the Editor-in-Chief conducts the investigation, and the Editors shall contact the author (s) to submit their explanation. And Suppose the manuscript is found to be plagiarized beyond the acceptable limits. In that case, the journal editor may be, with the help editorial team will contact the author and inform the author’s Institute / College / University and funding agency, if any.

After investigation, IAS shall take serious action against published manuscripts found to contain plagiarism and shall completely remove them from the journal website and other third-party websites where the paper is listed and indexed. Upon having established that the manuscript is plagiarized from some previously published work, IAS journal shall support the original author and manuscript irrespective of the publisher. It may take any or all actions as per the COPE guidelines for plagiarised articles after publication. In case of plagiarism after publication, a ‘Retraction Note’ and a link to the original article is published on the electronic version of the plagiarized manuscript. An addendum with the retraction notification published in the particular journal has plagiarized articles also inform the other journals. IAS supports the original author and manuscript.

Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript ( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02A_Plagiarism_Submitted.pdf)

Suspected plagiarism in a published article ( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/02B_Plagiarism_Published.pdf)

RESEARCH ETHICS IN JOURNAL ARTICLE

IAS journals follow different ethics policies for their various subject journals.

Human and Other Animal Experiments

IAS asks authors to confirm that before the start of the study ethical and legal approval was obtained and state the name of the body which is approving it. The authors should also mention that experiments were performed as per relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations. Editors of IAS journals have to check all the animal /human study ethics. If any concern is raised or clarifications are needed, they may need to request ethical research approval from the authors.
Appropriate approval by all institutional or other human subjects review boards must be designated in the methods section. Authors should indicate formal review and approval or formal review and waiver. Suppose the work involves animal or human subjects; the author must ensure that the manuscript contains an institutional committee approval and a statement that all procedures comply with related laws and institutional guidelines. Work on patients or volunteers requires ethical committee approval and informed consent, which must be mentioned in the manuscript.     

The study contains a statement that informed consent was taken and that the work done has been carried out of a statement following The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki)  and that privacy rights must always be observed for experiments involving human subject. Appropriate agreements, consents and releases must be obtained where an author wishes to include situation details or other personal material or images of patients and other individuals in the IAS publication. The author must provide copies of consent or evidence that such consent has been obtained at the request of IAS.

Suppose a study that could potentially reveal the identity of a patient or study participant should not be included unless this information is essential for scientific purposes and provides written informed consent from the patient (or the patient’s parent or legal guardian). Informed consent requires that the patient (or the patient’s parent or legal guardian) be provided a copy of the manuscript to be published before providing consent. The authors must state that, to the best of their knowledge, no information that could identify patients or research participants is contained in the article.

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must mention compliance statements in the manuscript.

Patients & Research Participants

• Human rights, privacy, and confidentiality

IAS journal editors ask the author regarding patient consent, ethical approval, and maintaining confidentiality. However, the clinical study must be conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki principles and the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (www.icmje.org) about patient consent for clinical research or human participation.

If the article contains personal medical evidence around an identifiable living individual requires the patient’s explicit agreement before Pediatric Research can publish it. Suppose there is any accidental that a patient may be identified from a photo or other static or touching image, or from its legend or accompanying text. In that case, Pediatric Research requires a declaration in the published paper confirming that they have also obtained informed consent for publication of the imageries. All sensible measures must be taken to protect patient secrecy. Black bars over the eyes remain not acceptable incomes of anonymization.

For manuscript reporting studies involving vulnerable groups (for example, unconscious patients) where there is probable coercion (for example, prisoners) or where consent may not have stayed fully informed, manuscripts will be considered at the editor’s discretion. In the case of articles telling human transplantation studies, authors must include a statement declaring that no organs/tissues were got from convicts and necessity also name the institution(s)/clinic(s)/department(s) via which organs/tissues remained obtained.

• Case report: IAS journals that publish case reports see the patient consent

For the case report, IAS follow the CARE case report guidelines. The best policy is for journals to require authors to confirm whether explicit written consent to publish has been received from any described people (for example, in case reports). 
https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/journals%E2%80%99-best-practices-ensuring-consent-publishing-medical-case-reports

• Registering clinical trials

All clinical trials study must be registered in a public registry prior to submission. IAS Medical journals ask the author for Clinical trial registration numbers that must be included in all papers that report their results. A suitable statement about this in journal instructions for authors might read: “We require that clinical trials are prospectively registered in a publicly accessible database. IAS asks the author to include the name of the trial register and the clinical trial registration number at the end of the abstract. If the trial is not registered or was registered retrospectively, the author has to explain why.”
Pediatric study follows the trials registering policy of the ICMJE and considers only trials that have been suitably registered before submission, despite of when the trial closed to enrolment. All clinical trials that succumbed to Pediatric Research must be accompanied by a trial registration number, Institutional Review Board endorsement declaration and completed CONSORT checklist. 

• Animals in research

ARRIVE and Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: Research relating to animals should be conducted with the same strictness as research on humans. Therefore, the IAS journal encourages authors to execute the 3Rs principles: “The 3Rs are an extensively accepted ethical framework for conducting scientific experiments by animals humanely:

Replacement - use of non-animal methods; Reduction - methods which reduce the number of animals used; Refinement - methods which improve animal welfare.”
The International Council for Laboratory Animal Science has published ethical guidelines for editors and reviewers. IAS Journals encourage authors to adhere to animal research reporting standards which describe the details journals should require from authors regarding:

• Study design and statistical analysis.
• Experimental procedures.
• Experimental animals.
• Housing and husbandry.

In the biomedical sciences, subject editors of IAS journals consider only publishing information and images from individual participants where the authors have obtained the individual’s free prior informed consent. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ guidance says: “Non-essential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be found if there is any doubt that anonymity can be upheld. For example, masking the eye region in photos of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity.”

• Numerous ethical guidelines exist for researchers working with human participants in the social sciences and humanities. For example, social science and humanities researchers regularly work with audio and video materials gathered in public seats with no reasonable expectation of privacy. They also use materials derived from broadcast sources, as in some political science or cultural studies work, where copyright must be addressed, but consent issues do not arise. However, wherever appropriate, social scientists are also responsible for protecting the confidentiality of human participants. Obtaining informed consent from all participants by openly communicating information to one and all are likely to influence their willingness to participate (for example, sponsorship, purpose and anticipated outcomes, and possible consequences that publication of the research may have for participants). IAS Journals of social science and Education apply the rule and see the written consent for human confidentiality.

IAS OPEN ACCESS POLICY

IAS is committed to Open Access and all journal are open access journals.

What is Open Access? 

By Open Access, we mean the free and immediate availability of the accepted work on the public internet. Permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful purpose.

IAS believes everyone should get access to research without any financial barrier. Open Access publishing is a tool to reach this objective. IAS is committed to providing long-term, sustainable access to quality scientific research for everyone while maintaining high-value, trustworthy author and reader services that enhance scientific communication and progress. Widespread access to publicly funded research results is an essential, inseparable component of our nation’s investment in science. Results of publicly funded research should be shared in cost-effective ways to stimulate discovery and innovation and advance the translation of this knowledge into public benefits. Enhanced access to and expanded sharing of information will lead to usage by millions of scientists, professionals, and individuals. In addition, it will deliver an accelerated return on the public’s investment in this research.

IAS Journals provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge, meaning:

• Everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of articles published in Academy Journals; manuscripts are freely available without subscription or price barriers
• Papers are immediately released in open access format (no long waiting periods)
• Open Access publication is supported by authors’ institutes or research funding agencies by payment of a comparatively low Article Processing Fee (APF) for accepted articles

Advantages of Open Access for Authors

• High Visibility and High Availability - free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions.
• Open Access publications are more frequently cited due to their high publicity and availability.
• Publications are also more easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
• Less Costly - Each accepted paper’s editorial processing and editing fee is charged to authors, institutes, or research funding agencies. The cost of processing and the publication of an article is covered through the one-time payment of an Article Processing Fee (APF) for each accepted article.
• Rapid publication - accepted papers are immediately published online.

Open Access Licensing Policy

Online open and open access agreements
IAS requires authors wishing to make their article open access to sign an Open Access Agreement providing for the article to be made available under one of the Creative Commons Licenses in order to meet the terms of open access publication and ensure the broadest possible dissemination. The Creative Commons website explains how these licenses work. The publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License (CC BY). View Legal Code

Authorship and contributorship

These guidelines describe authorship principles and good authorship practices to which prospective authors should adhere. All those designated as authors must meet up all four criteria for authorship.

Authorship criteria

Authorship credit should be based on:

• Substantial contributions to conception and design, data acquisition, or data analysis and interpretation.
• Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content.
• Approved the version to be published; and
• agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

When a big, multicentre group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct accountability for the manuscript. “Group authorship” is endorsed in which the name of the group or program is scheduled as an author, with members of the group listed must meet the full criteria for authorship as described in the Acknowledgements section

Authorship clarified

The IAS  Journal and IAS assume all authors agree with the content and that all gave explicit consent to submit and obtain consent from the responsible authorities at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out before the work is submitted.

Disclosures and declarations

Authors are requested to include information regarding sources of funding, financial or non-financial interests, study-specific approval by the appropriate ethics committee for research involving humans and/or animals, informed consent if the research involved human participants,  and a statement on the welfare of animals if the research involved animals (as appropriate).

Data transparency

All authors are requested to make sure that all data and materials as well as a software application or custom code, support their published claims and comply with field standards as given in the instruction for authors in each journal of IAS.

Author contributions

Please check the Instructions for Authors of the Journal for specific instructions regarding contribution statements. The contributions of each author should be listed at the end of the submission.

For review articles where discrete statements are less applicable, a statement should be included who had the idea for the article, who performed the literature search and data analysis, and who drafted and/or critically revised the work. 
For articles based primarily on the student’s dissertation or thesis, it is recommended that the student is usually listed as the principal author.

Affiliation

The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may additionally be stated. Addresses will not be updated or changed after the publication of the article.

Changes to authorship

Authors are advised to ensure the correct author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors at submission. Changes of authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or changes in corresponding author, and/or changes in the sequence of authors are not accepted after acceptance of a manuscript. At the revision stage, change in name based on the IAS mechanism.

Author identification

Authors are recommended to use their Manuscript ID when submitting an article for consideration acquired through registration on the website as an author.

Deceased or incapacitated authors

For cases where a co-author dies or is incapacitated during the writing, submission, or peer-review process, and the co-authors feel it is appropriate to include the author, co-authors should obtain approval from a (legal) representative be a direct relative.

Authorship issues or disputes

In the case of an authorship dispute during peer review or after acceptance and publication, the journal will not be in a position to investigate or adjudicate. Authors will be asked to resolve the dispute themselves. If they are unable, the journal reserves the right to withdraw a manuscript from the editorial process or in case of a published paper, raise the issue with the authors’ institution(s) and abide by its guidelines.

Confidentiality

Authors should treat all communication with the journal as confidential.

FUNDING & CONTRIBUTORS LISTED IN ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Journals should request that authors list all funding sources in an Acknowledgments section. If there is no specific funding, then this should be stated. The role of the research funder beyond providing funding itself should also be described. It may be important to disclose, for example, if a commercial organization funded the study, designed the study, and also recruited the investigators.
Other sources of support should be clearly identified in the Acknowledgments section of the manuscript. For example, these might include funding for open access publication, funding for writing or editorial assistance, or provision of experimental materials. All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an acknowledgments section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, financial support, writing assistance, or a department head who provided only general support.

Authorship Disputes

To manage authorship disputes, editors should refer to the flowcharts from COPE and “How to spot authorship problems.” 
https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/how-handle-authorship-disputesa-guide-new-researchers

Links for the authorship changes

Corresponding author requests the addition of an extra author before publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04A_Author_Add_Submitted.pdf) 
Corresponding author requests removal of the author before publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04B_Author_Remove_Submitted.pdf) 
Request for addition of extra author after publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04C_Author_Add_Published.pdf) 
Request for removal of the author after publication
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/04D_Author_Remove_Published.pdf) 

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHOR, EDITOR, REVIEWER/ REVIEW POLICY & PUBLISHER

Roles of Authors

• All the work reported in the manuscript must be original and free from plagiarism.
• The work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) simultaneously.
• Any potential conflict of interest must be clearly acknowledged.
• Proper acknowledgments to other work reported (individual/company/institution) must be given. Permission must be obtained from any content used from other sources.
• Only those who have made any substantial contribution to the interpretation or composition of the submitted work should be listed as ‘Authors.’, While other contributors should be mentioned as ‘co-authors’.

Roles of Editors 

The editor is responsible for the quality of every published and printed material and for taking important editorial decisions on all peer-reviewed submitted manuscripts for final publication. Editors reorganize manuscripts within the parameter set by an author to be clearly understandable and available to their readers. The editorial process workflow for each journal is taken care of by a team of Editorial Board Members (EBMs) who have expertise in their specific fields. The services of Editorial Board Members are sought through invitations to organize and conduct the peer-review of a submitted manuscript, keeping in view the scope of the manuscript and the expertise of Editors in view. Manuscripts are forwarded for evaluation to Editors as well as external reviewers to check if the research work presented in the manuscript (a) falls within the scope of the journal and (b) meets the editorial criteria of IAS in terms of originality and quality. Following are the role of Editors:

• Review of manuscript
• Relationship with author and reviewer
• The double-blind peer review system
• Confidentiality of manuscript
• Funding in research & conflict of interest
• Redundancy of data
• In maintaining the transparency of the academic research & data
• Resolution of misconduct by diligence

Role of Reviewer & Reviewer Policy

Manuscripts submitted for publication in IAS journals are subjected to double-blind peer-review. 

The reviewer can place his comments or recommend rejecting any article if found to be inappropriate or irrelevant in terms of the subject provided in the title of the journal or found to be having redundant data or copied data without giving a proper citation.IAS Review policy includes the following steps

• Selection of reviewers: IAS selects reviewers from the community of scientists around the globe as per their subject suitability and expertise.
• The purpose of a review is to see the quality of article and to provide report of review which must be  about novelty in work with high standards, main finding in research, relevancy of work, referencing, acknowledgement, declaration supported by the experimental data and evidence for proving the data and finally how is the further direction would it be feasible to take current research.

Role of Reviewer 

• Ensure for correct and proper reporting of original results
• To check the experiments and analyses
• To check the interpretation of results
• To check for language of composition
• To  check ethics in experiments involving humans and animals
• IAS journals  manuscript should adhere to suitable reporting guidelines 
• Maintain confidentiality
• Personal obligation
• To check conflict of interest
• Prompt review in time
• Changes in review reports

What to do if case of reviewer has appropriated an author’s idea or data
( http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/07_Reviewer_misconduct.pdf) 

Role of Publishers

IAS  is dedicated to working with journal editors, defining clearly their relevant roles to ensure appropriate decisions regarding publication procedures and maintaining the transparency of editorial decisions.IAS  Understand Publication ethics discussed  and strictly follows its editorial policy and because of that, it ensures the reliability and originality of each published manuscript  with respect to the following :

• To promote and encourage policies regarding journals ethics, authorship, editorial independence, conflict of interest, research funding, review system and process.
• IAS publishers decline  to publish if manuscript when a conflict of interest exists
• To maintain the confidentiality of the author and their research work.
• Authorship
• Article modifications
• The publication should be done on a timely basis to achieve the just in time (JIT) policy of the journal.
• To maintain a relationship with editors and parties involved in the publication and support the editorial decisions and work in the way to achieve the publication goal set by the editor.
• To publish corrections, clarification and retractions whenever required.
• To Cooperate with the investigating parties if the condition occurs for any kind of investigation for any suspected research.
• Publication and research funding

Copyright

The publication is licensed under CC-By and is open access. Copyright is with the author and allowed to retain publishing rights without restrictions.

PUBLICATION FEE

IAS journals are open access journals, free to access, read and print. There is no pay-per-view, pay-per-print fee for the published articles. There are no editorial/peer review charges being solicited from the authors. However, the journal charges a minimum amount towards author registration (on the accepted article, after peer review) for publishing and maintaining the content online, outsourcing facilities, tools and resources towards the publication of the article. For details of the fee of various journals published by IAS, please visit their respective websites.

EDITORIAL PROCESS

Peer Review

IAS follows the double-blind peer-review procedure for submissions of manuscripts to journals. All submitted articles/eBook chapters are subjected to an extensive peer review in consultation with the journal’s editorial board members and independent external two reviewers. All manuscripts/chapters are assessed rapidly, and the decision based on all the peer reviewers’ comments, taken by the journal’s Editor-in-Chief, is then conveyed to the author(s). Submissions from the Editor-in-Chief will undergo independent peer review and will be submitted to another Editor for his decision on acceptance. IAS follows COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Peer review process chart is shown in the figure below:

Timing of Publication

IAS Editors aim to ensure timely peer review and publication and should avoid unnecessary delays. Editors should consider how best to share information with authors in time. Online publication can provide the fastest route to publication and, therefore, to placing peer-reviewed research information in the public domain.

Conflicts of Interest

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editor’s definition of conflicts of interest is as follows:
“A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.”

Strict IAS policies preventing people with conflicts of interest from publishing might encourage authors to conceal relevant interests. Potential conflicts of interest include affiliations, financial relationships, personal relationships, or funding sources that could be perceived as influencing an author’s objectivity regarding the manuscript content. Conflict of interest disclosures will be published in a footnote accompanying the article. Financial contributions to the work being reported should be clearly acknowledged, as should any potential conflict of interest.

• Editors should clearly explain what should be disclosed, including the period these statements should cover (threeyears). In addition, editors should ask authors to describe relevant funding, including the purpose of the funding (for example, travel grant and speaker’s fees), and to clarify relevant patents, stocks, and shares that they own.
• Editors should publish authors’ conflicts of interest whenever relevant or a statement of their absence. If there is doubt, editors should opt in favor of greater disclosure.
• If authors state that there are no conflicts of interest, editors should publish a confirmation to this effect.
• Editors should manage peer reviewers’ conflicts of interest. For example, an invitation to review a manuscript should be accompanied by a request for the reviewer to reveal any potential conflicts of interest and a request for the peer reviewer to disqualify or recuse themselves when these are relevant.
• When editors, members of editorial boards and other editorial staff are presented with papers where their interests may be perceived to impair their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should withdraw from discussions, deputize decisions or suggest that authors seek publication in a different journal.

COPE has published flowcharts  that illustrate a suitable process for investigating suspected undisclosed conflicts of interest.

If a reviewer suspects a case of undisclosed conflict of interest (COI) in a submitted manuscript
http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/05A_CoI_Submitted.pdf 

Copyediting and Proofs

IAS asks authors for Articles must be written in good English in a clear and correct style to maintain uniformity throughout the text. Editors ensure that Articles/chapters submitted are copyedited before they are published.

Editorial Independence and Commercial Issues

The Council of Science Editors presents the discussion of editorial independence in its White Paper on “Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications.” The relationship between the editor and the journal owner and publisher should be set out in a formal contract. It may be useful to establish a mechanism to resolve disputes before one is needed in order to help resolve any disagreements speedily. Journal owners (whether learned societies or publishers) should avoid influencing editorial decisions.

• Editors’ decisions about whether to publish individual manuscripts submitted to their journal should not be influenced by pressure from the editor’s employer, the journal owner, or the publisher. Ideally, the principles of editorial independence should be set out in the editor’s contract.
• It is appropriate for journal owners/publishers to discuss general editorial processes and policies with journal editors (for example, whether or not a journal should publish a particular type of article), but they should not get involved in decisions made by the editor about individual articles.

IAS suggests that editors, journal owners, and publishers establish processes that minimize the risk of editorial decisions being influenced by commercial, personal, or political factors. Editorial decisions about individual papers should remain separate from the sale of advertising.

The Council of Science Editors presents further discussion of editorial independence in their white paper on integrity and in the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

Appeals and Complaints

IAS publications have a mechanism for authors to appeal editorial decisions, facilitate genuine appeals, and discourage repeated or unfounded appeals. Editors allow appeals to override earlier decisions only when new information becomes available (for example, additional factual input by the authors, revisions, extra material in the manuscript, or appeals about conflicts of interest and concerns about biased peer review). Reversals of decisions without new evidence should be avoided.

• Editors should mediate all exchanges between authors and peer reviewers during the peer-review process. Editors may seek comments from additional peer reviewers to help them make their final decision.
• Journals should state in their guidelines that the editor’s decision following an appeal is final.
• Acceptance of the manuscript is not guaranteed even if the journal agrees to reconsider the manuscript. The reconsideration process may involve previous or new reviewers or editors and substantive revision. Authors who wish to make a complaint should refer them to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal concerned. Complaints to the Publisher may be emailed to [email protected]

Corrections

Errata and corrections in published articles

Authors and readers are encouraged to notify the Editor-in-Chief if they find errors in published content, authors’ names and affiliations, or have reasons for concern over the legitimacy of a publication. In such cases, the journal will publish an ERRATUM in consultation with Editor-in-Chief and authors of the article, and/or replace or retract the article.

Journals should encourage readers and authors to notify them if they find errors, especially errors that could affect the interpretation of data or information presented in an article. When an error is identified:

• Journals should work with authors and their publishers to correct important published errors.
• Journals should publish corrections when important errors are found and should consider retraction when errors are so fundamental that they invalidate the work.
• Corrections arising from errors within an article should be distinguishable from retractions and statements of concern relating to misconduct.
• Corrections should be included in indexing systems and linked to the original article.
• Corrections should be free to access.

Article Withdrawal 

Withdrawal or removal of articles is strongly discouraged by IAS. The practice of removal, deletion, or obscuring of an article or part of an article is limited to circumstances such as:

• Legal infringements, defamation, or other legal limitations; or
• False or inaccurate data, especially those that could pose a serious health risk if acted upon.

Articles that have been withdrawn by the author or retracted by the publisher will be accompanied with a notice that provides a reason why the article has been withdrawn or retracted. Articles in Press (articles that have been accepted for publication or published as E-pub Ahead of Schedule but which have not been formally published with volume/issue/page information) that include errors or are determined to violate the publishing ethics guidelines such as multiple submission, fake claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like, may be “Withdrawn” from the journal. Withdrawal means that the article files are removed and replaced with a PDF stating that the article has been withdrawn from the journal in accordance with IAS Editorial Policies.

Article Retraction

Published articles (with volume/issue/page information) which may contain infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like are retracted. IAS follows COPE’s retraction guidelines
http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines

Misconduct 

Members of IAS journal publishing teams have a key role in addressing possible cases of data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, biased reporting, authorship abuse, redundant or duplicate publication, and undeclared conflicts interest. IAS Follows the guidelines of COPE for the misconduct in research.

https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/sharing-information-among-editors-chief-regarding-possible-misconduct

Fabrication, Falsification and Image Manipulation

IAS educates about image manipulation and, where appropriate, might check images. We ask authors to declare where manipulations have been made. IAS asks the author that specific features within an image should not be enhanced, obscured, removed, moved, or introduced. Guidelines of COPE are followed. 

Image manipulation in a published article
Fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
Fabricated data in a published article

• Suspected fabricated data in a published article.
  (https://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts/clone-what-do-if-you-suspect-fabricated-data)

How COPE handles complaints against editors?

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u7140/Flowchart%20Complaints%20revised%20Apr%2012.pdf) 
Whistleblowing

Allegations of alleged misconduct that have specific, detailed proof to support the claim should be checked appropriately, whether they are raised secretly or by named “whistle-blowers. IAS follows COPE guidelines for the editors to respond to a communication from whistle-blowers.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

IAS has a method to detect concurrent or multiple submissions. IAS editors use a mechanism to check the duplication as part of their editorial office system. If multiple submissions are detected, the editor works with the IAS publisher and refers to the COPE flowchart on redundant publication in a submitted manuscript. Dual publication of an article is generally not permitted. In signing the Agreement, authors are asked to represent that the contribution has not been submitted elsewhere for publication.

Editors of IAS have a policy for Abstracts and posters of conferences, results presented at meetings (for example, to inform investigators or participants about findings), results databases (data without interpretation, discussion, context or conclusions in the form of tables and text to describe data/information where this is not easily presented in tabular form) are not considered prior publication

Authors who wish to publish translations of the articles published elsewhere should ensure that they have appropriate permission(s), indicate clearly that the material has been translated and republished and indicate the original source of the material. COPE cases regarding multiple publications are as on given link

• Suspected redundant publication in a submitted manuscript

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/01A_Redundant_Submitted.pdf)

• Suspected redundant publication in a published article

(http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/01B_Redundant_Published.pdf)

The following types of “prior publication” do not present cause for concerns about duplicate or redundant publication:

• an abstract
• a poster
• a thesis or dissertation that is not copyright protected
• a presentation
• a manuscript posted on a personal or institutional website

If a paper is published and later found to be redundant, the editor should refer to the COPE Flowcharts and should consider working with their publisher to retract the duplicate paper.

Sanctions 

For sanctions, IAS journals follow COPE guidelines in the given link
https://publicationethics.org/files/u7141/1999pdf13.pdf

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS AND SPECIAL ISSUES

Publication ethics policy, as mentioned earlier, is applicable for the publication of conference proceedings and special issues. The qualified guest editor is responsible for the peer review process. The journal editorial board further reviews manuscripts recommended by the guest editor and finally, those approved by the editor-in-chief are processed for publication.

Qualified quest editor is an acknowledged subject expert having experience in execution of related tasks and has a wide network of authors and experts of the subject area. The guest editor is supported and trained to handle the online manuscript managing system to execute the entire editorial and peer review process.

IAS Policy on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use in Publications

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools—including ChatGPT and Large Language Models—are quickly being included in articles and book publications. IAS recognizes the significant contribution artificial intelligence may provide to improve the writing process for distribution and raise the quality of research. Understanding these developments, IAS supports AI-driven ideas that improve language, help with data synthesis and analysis, enable research discovery, and enable submission organization.

AI cannot replace human creativity and critical thinking even if it offers advantages. Guidelines for the moral use of artificial intelligence technology to support editors, reviewers, and authors in reaching wise conclusions have been developed by IAS. These rules will be routinely revised to fit current events. This restriction notably relates only to the writing process and does not address the use of AI tools for data analysis inside the research itself.

For Authors

Though only to enhance language clarity and readability, authors are allowed to employ generative AI and AI-assisted technologies during the writing process before submission. Any usage of such tools has to be suitably reported.

No submission should attribute AI tools like ChatGPT as an author. Authors must clearly state whether artificial intelligence is used for drafting text, creating images or graphics, or helping with data collecting and analysis in the Materials and Methods section—or the acknowledgments part. Authors remain liable for any ethical violations and carry full responsibility for all of the material in their work, including sections produced with AI help. As AI use rules may vary between publishers and journals, it is their obligation to guarantee the originality and correctness of their work.

Artificial Intelligence in Figures, Images, and Artwork

IAS forbids the use of generative artificial intelligence or AI-assisted tools to produce or alter images included into accepted papers. This covers activities of enhancing, hiding, changing, deleting, or adding aspects to an image or figure. Changes to brightness, contrast, or color balance are allowed, though, provided they do not obscure or remove any essential information from the original image.

An exception exists if, like in biomedical imaging, AI-assisted technologies are essential components of the study approach. Under such circumstances, the application of artificial intelligence has to be specifically mentioned in the section on Methods, together with specifics on the tool, version, model, and maker.

Graphical abstracts cannot be created with generative artificial intelligence. AI-generated cover art, however, might be permitted in particular cases only if the author gets prior permission from the publisher and the journal editor guarantees adequate rights clearance and correctly credits the material.

For Reviewers

Reviewers should not post manuscripts or any part of them into generative AI systems since, particularly if personally identifiable information is present, doing so could endanger author confidentiality, intellectual rights, or data priva.

Confidentiality also covers reports on peer review. Even for language enhancement, reviewers should not employ artificial intelligence methods to enhance or change their peer review reports. Should any part of their assessment call for AI support, they have to clearly state this in their peer review report.

Dealing with Unpublished or Inappropriate AI Use

Reviewers should notify the journal editor if they believe a manuscript uses generative artificial intelligence improperly or understatedly. Editors who believe AI tools like ChatGPT have been utilized in a submitted paper or review should refer to this guideline when evaluating the matter or contact their IAS representative for direction.

Important Motives for Limiting AI in Peer Review Processes

Relying on AI-generated summaries could reduce a reviewer’s capacity to critically evaluate the material; AI-generated content may include erroneous or misleading information; AI models may reflect prejudices present in their training data, so influencing the validity of the review.

For Editors

Artificial Intelligence in the Editorial Process

Editing scientific publications calls for human judgment and accountability. Editors should not employ generative artificial intelligence, or AI-assisted technologies, to evaluate or decide on articles since these instruments lack the critical thinking and sophisticated knowledge required for honest assessments. AI-generated findings also could be biassed, incomplete, or false.

Including final judgments and author correspondence, editors bear whole responsibility for the integrity of the editorial process. Editors cannot put submitted manuscripts, or any part of them, into AI tools as they are private and would violate author confidentiality, property rights, and data privacy laws. Editorial letters, which should not be handled by AI technologies even for language improvement, follow the same confidentiality concept.

If an editor believes an author or reviewer has breached AI guidelines, they must let the publisher know.

IAS’s editorial screening AI application

IAS uses licensed AI-assisted algorithms for plagiarism detection, reviewer identification, and completeness checks. These guarantee author privacy by working inside tight confidentiality and compliance policies. IAS keeps improving these technologies to ensure they fit ethical norms and data security criteria. Moreover, IAS is dedicated to implementing AI-driven solutions that support editors and reviewers in line with the integrity and openness of the editorial process.