Ethical Policies and Practices

Guidelines for Editors and Reviewers

Journal Editors are encouraged to follow the Code of Conduct to ensure fairness, integrity, and accountability in the editorial process. The key guidelines include:

• Editorial Independence: Editors must make decisions based on the quality and relevance of the work, free from undue influence from authors, funders, or other external parties.
• Fairness: All submissions should be evaluated objectively, without bias based on the author's nationality, gender, religion, or institutional affiliation.
• Confidentiality: Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and the identities of authors and reviewers, unless disclosure is required by law.
• Conflict of Interest: Editors should avoid any conflicts of interest that could influence their editorial decisions and should disclose any potential conflicts.
• Responsibility for Content: Editors are responsible for ensuring that published content adheres to ethical standards, including issues of plagiarism, data fabrication, and human or animal rights violations.
• Timeliness: Editors should handle all submissions, reviews, and decisions in a timely manner, communicating clearly with authors about expected timelines and any delays.
• Appeals: Editors should have a clear process for handling author appeals against editorial decisions. Appeals should be considered fairly and independently.
• Publication Ethics: Editors should work with authors, reviewers, and publishers to uphold publication ethics, ensuring accurate and truthful reporting in all stages of the publishing process.

Reviewers are referred to Ethical Guidelines to maintain the integrity and quality of the research published in journals. The key guidelines include:

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and their contents as confidential. They should not disclose or discuss the material with others unless authorized.
• Objectivity: Reviews should be based on the content of the manuscript, not personal bias or conflicts of interest. Reviewers should provide constructive, objective feedback.
• Timeliness: Reviewers should conduct their assessments in a timely manner and notify the editor if they are unable to meet the deadline.
• Acknowledging Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should declare any potential conflicts of interest, such as personal or professional relationships with the authors, that could affect the impartiality of the review.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, reasoned, and professional feedback that helps authors improve their work. Criticism should be aimed at the work, not the authors personally.
• Originality: Reviewers should identify any issues with plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical research practices. They must ensure the manuscript meets ethical standards before publication.

IASRD's publication ethics policies are guided by the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

The publisher follows internationally recognized publication ethics principles for handling allegations of misconduct impartially and responsibly through several key principles:

• Fairness and Transparency: All allegations of misconduct must be handled in a transparent manner, ensuring all parties involved are treated fairly and are given an opportunity to respond to the claims.
• Confidentiality: The investigation process must maintain confidentiality to protect the privacy of the individuals involved, including authors, reviewers, and editors.
• Independence: Editors and journals should investigate allegations without bias or influence from external sources, ensuring that decisions are based solely on the facts and evidence presented.
• Due Process: IASRD emphasizes the need for a structured process that includes clear steps for investigating and resolving allegations. This may involve gathering evidence, consulting with relevant stakeholders (e.g., authors, institutions), and giving authors the opportunity to address the concerns raised.
• Accountability: If misconduct is confirmed, journals are encouraged to take appropriate actions, such as issuing retractions, corrections, or clarifications, depending on the severity of the issue. IASRD also stresses the importance of keeping records of the investigation and outcome.
• Proportionality: Actions taken should be proportional to the severity of the misconduct. Not all instances of misconduct require the same level of intervention, and IASRD guidelines suggest a measured approach depending on the case.

Editors and staff are advised to notify their IASRD contact immediately upon learning of any ethical concerns. Ethical concerns are reviewed by the editorial team and, where necessary, external advice may be sought.

Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern

IASRD is committed to maintaining the integrity of the published academic record. When errors or misconduct are identified — whether before or after publication — appropriate action will be taken promptly and transparently.

• Corrections: A correction (erratum) will be issued when a published article contains a minor error that does not affect the overall findings, conclusions, or integrity of the work. Corrections are linked to the original article and clearly dated.
• Retractions: An article will be retracted if there is clear evidence of fabricated or falsified data, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other serious ethical violations that undermine the reliability of the findings. Retraction notices are published openly and linked to the original article.
• Expressions of Concern: Where an investigation is ongoing or evidence is inconclusive, IASRD may issue an Expression of Concern to alert readers while the matter is being resolved.
• Removal: In rare cases — such as where content is found to be defamatory, unlawful, or poses a serious health risk — an article may be removed entirely from the published record.

All corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern are handled in accordance with the COPE Core Practices and internationally accepted publication ethics standards, and made freely accessible to all readers.

Ethical Focus Areas

IASRD provides best practice guidelines in critical areas, including:

• Authorship standards
• Article submission procedures
• Conflict of interest management
• Transparent and fair peer review processes
• Promotion of ethical research

Authors should review the ethical policies of the specific journal prior to submission. IASRD takes publication ethics seriously and is committed to supporting both editorial teams and authors in maintaining these high standards.

Data Policy

IASRD is committed to promoting transparency and reproducibility in research. Authors are expected to adhere to the following data-related standards:

• Data Accuracy: Authors must ensure that all data presented in their manuscripts is accurate and has not been fabricated, falsified, or selectively reported to misrepresent findings.
• Data Fabrication and Falsification: The fabrication or falsification of research data is considered a serious form of research misconduct. Any confirmed instance will result in retraction of the published article and may be reported to the author's institution.
• Data Sharing: Where possible and appropriate, authors are encouraged to make their research data openly available to support transparency and reproducibility. Data should be deposited in a recognised repository and referenced in the manuscript.
• Data Retention: Authors are expected to retain raw data related to their published work for a reasonable period following publication, and to provide this data upon reasonable request from editors or reviewers during the review process.
• Human and Animal Research: Research involving human participants or animals must comply with relevant ethical guidelines and regulatory requirements. Authors must confirm that appropriate ethical approval was obtained and state this clearly in the manuscript.

Article Submission Policy

IASRD is committed to ensuring that editors, peer reviewers, and journal administrators handle all submissions with respect, confidentiality, and adherence to ethical guidelines. Proven cases of misconduct may lead to actions such as:

• Retraction of published work.
• Publication of a correction or statement of concern.
• Refusal to accept future submissions.
• Notification of misconduct to the author's institution, supervisor, or ethics committee, where appropriate.

Redundant Publications (Dual Submission or Publication)

Manuscripts submitted to IASRD-published journals must not have been previously published or be under consideration by another journal. Allegations of redundant publication are thoroughly investigated following ethical guidelines.

Plagiarism

All submissions to IASRD journals are expected to be original works of the author(s). Reusing text, data, figures, or images without proper acknowledgment or permission constitutes plagiarism. IASRD journals investigate all plagiarism allegations thoroughly. Many journals use plagiarism detection software either systematically or selectively.

Defamation

IASRD strives to balance freedom of expression with the need to avoid publishing content that could harm the reputation of individuals, groups, or organizations unless such claims are substantiated.