Author

IASRD Commitment

At the International Association for Social Research Dynamics (IASRD), we are committed to advancing the accessibility of scholarly research and knowledge. The open-access policy of our Journal of Social Research Dynamics ensures that all published content is freely available to everyone, promoting the global dissemination of research findings and fostering innovation and collaboration across disciplines.

Manuscript Preparation Guidelines

• Title: A clear and specific title, not exceeding 25 words, avoiding trademarks, proprietary terms, or abbreviations.
• Running Title: A concise version of the title, limited to 50 characters.
• Author Details: Provide the full names, affiliations (including department, institution, city, country, and postal code), and email addresses of all authors. Include current addresses and ORCID IDs, where applicable.
• Authorship Changes: Any adjustments to authorship post-submission (addition, removal, or reordering) require written consent from all authors.
• Main Manuscript
  • Length: Manuscripts should not exceed 6,000 words and not less than 4000 words, including references, tables, and figures. A concise abstract (up to 150 words) and up to five keywords should precede the main text.
  • File Format: Submit the manuscript in Microsoft Word or a compatible editable format.
  • Page and Line Numbering: Number all pages in the top-right corner and include continuous line numbering.
  • Clarity: Clearly distinguish letters (e.g., "O" vs. "0") and unusual symbols.

Style and Language

• Manuscripts must be written in clear, concise English, adhering to standard spelling and conventions. Poor language quality may result in manuscripts being returned without review.

Measurement Units and Abbreviations

• Use System International (SI) units. Define abbreviations upon first mention in the text, and use them consistently thereafter.

Mathematics and Equations

• Mathematical content should only be included if essential to the paper’s objectives. Authors should explain its necessity and ensure arguments are accessible to non-specialist readers. Mathematical elements may be placed in an appendix, and empirical data or specialized programs should be made available upon request.

Endnotes

• Use the Microsoft Word Endnote tool for endnotes, formatted numerically (1, 2, 3…) and placed at the end of the manuscript before the References section.

Acknowledgments

• Declare all funding sources, sponsorships, and institutional affiliations, providing grant numbers if applicable. Acknowledge personal contributions before institutional or agency support.

References

• Use in-text citations with author names and publication year. For multiple authors, list all names for two authors and use "et al." for more than two.
• Provide a complete, alphabetized reference list following these examples:

Journal Article: Bonilla-Silva, E. (2015). More than prejudice: Restatement, reflections, and new directions in critical race theory. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 1(1), 73-87.

Book: Kite, M. E., Whitley Jr, B. E., & Wagner, L. S. (2022). Psychology of prejudice and discrimination. Routledge.

Thesis: Du, K. (2023). Prejudice: How Did We Get Here and What’s Ahead of Us? (Doctoral dissertation, University of Otago).

Figures and Tables

• Submit figures and tables as separate editable files.
  • Figures: Provide high-resolution files (.tif, .png, or .jpeg), ensuring clarity without 3D effects or background tints. Include self-contained legends.
  • Tables: Number sequentially, ensuring self-explanatory content. Avoid complex layouts and include brief descriptive titles.

Appendices and Supplementary Information

• Long appendices may be published online as supplementary material if unsuitable for print.

Accessibility: Alt Text for Figures

Authors are encouraged to include alternative text (alt text) for all visual elements, ensuring accessibility for readers with visual impairments or screen readers. Alt text should concisely describe the content and context of figures.

Submission Enquiries

Email: info@iasrd.com

Additional Guidelines for Authors

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material that enhances the manuscript but is not essential for its core conclusions can be made available online. Examples include additional datasets, extended methodologies, or extra figures. This material must complement the manuscript but should not be critical to understanding the main text.

Submission Requirements: All supplementary materials should be submitted alongside the main manuscript for peer review. Changes to supplementary content after acceptance are not permitted. Clearly identify supplementary material during submission and reference it appropriately in the manuscript.

Formats: Ensure all supplementary text and figures are submitted in suitable electronic formats. Detailed preparation instructions are available online.

Language Editing

Authors, particularly non-native English speakers, are encouraged to have their manuscripts edited for clarity and language before submission. While not mandatory, language editing can help reviewers and editors better assess the academic content. Several professional editing services are available online, and authors are responsible for any associated costs. Note that language editing does not guarantee acceptance.

Online Submission

Authors should consult the detailed guidance on manuscript submission provided on the journal’s website.

Copyright and Licensing

Copyright Transfer: Upon acceptance, authors are required to complete an online copyright licence to publish form, licensing copyright to the IASRD. This ensures consistent handling of reproduction requests and broad dissemination of the work. Authors retain the right to reuse their material in other publications, provided the journal is acknowledged as the original source is notified in advance.

Open Access Option: Authors can choose between a standard licence or an open access licence. Some funding bodies mandate open access publication, so authors should confirm their requirements before proceeding.

Open Access Charges: Open access publication involves a fee. Authors should select their preferred open access licence after their article is accepted.

Open Access Options: Authors have the opportunity to publish open access, potentially free of charge if their institution participates in an IASRD read-and-publish agreement.

Read and Publish Agreements: Authors affiliated with institutions participating in IASRD’s Read and Publish agreements may have their open access fees covered. Check your institution's participation status.

Third-Party Content: For Open Access papers containing material without Open Access reuse permissions, authors must provide a clear credit line acknowledging the rights holder. Example:

[Title of content]

Author, Original publication, year of original publication, by permission of [rights holder]

This image/content is not covered by the terms of the Creative Commons licence of this publication. For permission to reuse, please contact the rights holder.

Funding Data Registry

Authors must disclose funding sources or confirm the absence of funding during the submission process to comply with funder requirements.

Pre-Publication Policy

The journal does not accept manuscripts that have been previously published elsewhere.

Conflict of Interest Policy (Management Procedures)

Editors

1. Submission by an Editor
   If an Editor submits a paper, it will be managed by another Editor who is not affiliated with the same institution. This impartial Editor will oversee the entire process, including referee selection and decision-making. The submitting Editor will not have access to any related information or correspondence.
2. Submission by an Author Affiliated with the Same Institution as an Editor
   If an author submits a paper while being affiliated with the same institution as one of the Editors, the paper will be handled by a different Editor unaffiliated with that institution. This impartial Editor will be responsible for the final decision.
3. Submission by an Author with a Personal Connection to an Editor
   In cases where an author’s relationship with an Editor (e.g., family, partnership, friendship, rivalry) could raise concerns of bias, the Editor must declare a conflict of interest. The submission will be managed by a different Editor, and the conflicted Editor will not participate in referee selection or decision-making.
4. General Policy
   Editors must declare any potential conflicts of interest if they believe handling a submission could be perceived as biased. Such submissions will follow the processes described above to ensure impartiality.

Referees

1. Potential Conflict of Interest for Referees
   Referees will receive an invitation including the statement:

If you believe you can identify the author of this paper and feel that a strong conflict of interest exists, please inform us immediately. By accepting this invitation, it is assumed that no such conflict exists.
If a conflict of interest is declared, the referee will generally not be used. However, Editors may exercise discretion in exceptional cases.

Authors

1. Sources of Funding
   Upon acceptance, authors must disclose all funding sources related to their research. This information will be published in the Acknowledgements section of their paper.

Peer Review Policy

The journal employs a double-anonymized peer review process, ensuring that:

• Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
• Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
  Editors, however, have access to both sets of identities for oversight. For additional information, refer to the journal's detailed peer review guidelines.

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 guideline include:

1. 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.
2. Fairness: All submissions should be evaluated objectively, without bias based on the author's nationality, gender, religion, or institutional affiliation.
3. Confidentiality: Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and the identities of authors and reviewers, unless disclosure is required by law.
4. Conflict of Interest: Editors should avoid any conflicts of interest that could influence their editorial decisions and should disclose any potential conflicts.
5. 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.
6. 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:

1. Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts and their contents as confidential. They should not disclose or discuss the material with others unless authorized.
2. Objectivity: Reviews should be based on the content of the manuscript, not personal bias or conflicts of interest. Reviewers should provide constructive, objective feedback.
3. Timeliness: Reviewers should conduct their assessments in a timely manner and notify the editor if they are unable to meet the deadline.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Originality: Reviewers should identify any issues with plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical research practices. They must ensure the manuscript meets ethical standards before publication.

1. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

IASRD guidelines provide a framework for handling allegations of misconduct impartially and responsibly through several key principles:

1. 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.
2. Confidentiality: The investigation process must maintain confidentiality to protect the privacy of the individuals involved, including authors, reviewers, and editors.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
   • IASRD staff, trained in managing misconduct investigations, will seek legal counsel when necessary.

 

1. 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.

Authorship Guidelines

IASRD emphasizes the importance of clear and accurate authorship attribution in all published articles. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all contributors are fairly acknowledged and that the author list accurately reflects the contributions of each individual. In cases of authorship disputes, IASRD provides guidelines to ensure that authorship disputes are handled ethically, promoting fairness, transparency, and accountability in the research publication process.

These guidelines state the following:

1. Clear Authorship Criteria: Authorship should be based on substantial contributions to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the research. COPE advises journals to clearly define authorship criteria to avoid disputes before the submission process.
2. Early Communication: Disputes should ideally be addressed early in the research process, preferably before submission or publication. Open and clear communication among co-authors is encouraged to prevent misunderstandings.
3. Investigation Process: If an authorship dispute arises after submission, the editor should first attempt to resolve the matter informally by engaging all relevant parties, including the authors and the corresponding author. If informal resolution fails, a more formal investigation may be necessary.
4. Involvement of Institutions: If the dispute cannot be resolved at the journal level, IASRD recommends involving the institutions of the authors, especially when there are allegations of misconduct or unethical behavior (e.g., ghost authorship, honorary authorship).
5. Final Decision: If the dispute remains unresolved, the journal editor should make the final decision, which may include revising the authorship list or, in extreme cases, retracting the article if the dispute compromises the integrity of the research.
6. Transparency and Documentation: Throughout the process, IASRD emphasizes that all actions should be documented and transparent. Editors should ensure that the outcome is fair and that the resolution process is clear to all parties involved.

Authorship Criteria

IASRD supports the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) definitions of authorship. While specific definitions may vary by journal, research field, or article type, authorship is generally limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the design, execution, or interpretation of the work.

Some journals may require a brief description of each author’s contribution, either as part of the submitted files or in the acknowledgments section. Authors should refer to the submission guidelines of the relevant journal for specific requirements.

Note:

• Symbolic figures, such as Camille Noûs, and AI-driven tools, such as ChatGPT, do not qualify as authors.
• The use of AI for tasks such as content generation, image creation, code writing, data processing, or translation must be disclosed in both the cover letter and the manuscript (e.g., in the Methods or Acknowledgments sections).

Changes to Authorship

Requests to modify the author list must be directed to the journal editor or administrator. These requests will be handled in accordance with ethical guidelines and the journal's specific policies. Changes are permitted only when valid reasons are provided, and all authors agree to the modification.

Post-publication changes to authorship are typically addressed through a formal correction or erratum.

Key Points for Changes in Authorship:

• Adding an Author Before Publication: Requests must include justification and agreement from all authors.
• Removing an Author Before Publication: A valid reason and agreement from all authors are required.
• Adding an Author Post-Publication: Changes will be considered on a case-by-case basis and corrected through formal channels.
• Removing an Author Post-Publication: Such changes require justification and author agreement and will be addressed via an erratum.

To qualify for IASRD’s Read and Publish agreements, the corresponding author must use their eligible institution as their primary affiliation at the time of manuscript submission. Changing the corresponding author after submission is only allowed for substantive reasons and not to gain access to Read and Publish funding.

Ethical Concerns in Authorship

1. Ghost, Guest, and Gift Authorship
   IASRD firmly opposes unethical authorship practices, including ghost, guest, and gift authorship, and collaborates with editors and publishing partners to address these issues. Any identified instance of unethical authorship will result in corrective action, such as a post-publication correction or erratum. The authors' institutions or ethics committees may also be notified.
   • Ghost Authorship: Refers to individuals who contribute to a study but are not credited as authors. These individuals are often paid sponsors, employees, junior researchers, or external affiliates.
   • Guest or Gift Authorship: Refers to naming individuals who made little or no contribution to the study as authors. Gift authors are often senior researchers, affiliated colleagues, or individuals added for social or professional reasons. Some organizations also offer gift authorship for a fee.

IASRD is committed to upholding ethical standards in authorship and encourages all contributors to ensure transparency and integrity in their practices.

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. IASRD requires all manuscript submissions to comply with established publishing standards and ethical practices. 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.

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. Editors and journal administrators are encouraged to maintain detailed records of communications with authors, reviewers, and editors, which may be used in misconduct investigations. Where appropriate, IASRD collaborates with other publishers to identify and address redundant publications.

Plagiarism

All submissions to IASRD journals are expected to be original works of the author(s). Proper credit must be given to all references cited, and authors must secure any necessary permissions before publication. IASRD adheres to the STM Permissions Guidelines, which can help reduce permission fees for authors.

Reusing text, data, figures, or images without proper acknowledgment or permission, as well as paraphrasing others’ ideas without credit, constitutes plagiarism. IASRD journals investigate all plagiarism allegations thoroughly, following ethical guidelines. Many journals use plagiarism detection software either systematically or selectively; submission guidelines outline how this is applied.

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. Efforts are made to ensure published content is free of defamatory or libelous material.

Conflict of Interest Policy

For Authors

A conflict of interest arises when an author’s private interests might compromise their objectivity or lead others to question the integrity of their work. The corresponding author is responsible for identifying and declaring any potential conflicts of interest among co-authors. This may include submitting completed forms or statements before the manuscript’s acceptance.

Conflicts of interest should be disclosed in the Acknowledgments section or during submission. Disclosures should include:

• Sources of funding, including financial support, provision of materials, or technical assistance.
• The role of funders or sponsors in the research design, execution, analysis, interpretation, and reporting.
• Relevant financial or non-financial interests, such as patents, stock ownership, advisory roles, consultancies, or speaker fees.

Authors are encouraged to ask themselves if any undisclosed relationships or arrangements would cause embarrassment if revealed post-publication.

For Editors

Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when assuming their role and to update these disclosures annually. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where conflicts of interest exist and avoid assigning handling editors or reviewers in situations that may lead to conflicts.

For Reviewers

Editors and journal administrators should consider potential conflicts of interest when assigning reviewers. Review invitations may include a statement that acceptance implies no financial or competing interests. Reviewers who identify a conflict of interest must disclose it, allowing the editor to assign an alternative reviewer. Reviewers failing to disclose conflicts may be removed from the journal’s database.

Fair Editing and Peer Review

Editorial Independence

IASRD ensures editors maintain full editorial independence. While IASRD may engage in discussions on strategy, process, or policy, editors are never pressured to accept manuscripts for commercial or political reasons. IASRD-published journals are encouraged to implement policies ensuring all submissions, including those from editors or editorial board members, undergo fair and unbiased peer review.

Peer Review Process and Reviewer Conduct

IASRD supports ethical peer review practices and refers editors to the Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. The peer review system may vary (e.g., single-blind, double-blind, or open review), and each journal’s submission guidelines specify the process.

Example of a typical process:

• Manuscripts are reviewed by two independent experts who provide assessments and recommendations.
• Reviewers’ identities remain confidential.
• A handling editor evaluates the manuscript and reviewer feedback to make a final decision (accept, revise, or reject).

Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers are expected to treat all submissions as confidential. If a reviewer wishes to consult a colleague on a manuscript, prior approval must be obtained from the editor. Any allegations of editors or reviewers misusing ideas from a manuscript will be investigated according to Ethical guidelines.

Peer Review Fraud

Some journals allow authors to suggest potential reviewers. It is the responsibility of the lead author to provide accurate and genuine reviewer information. Allegations of fabricated reviewer details are thoroughly investigated. Proven misconduct results in the rejection of the manuscript or retraction if already published. Additionally, the authors’ institution or ethics council may be informed, and the author group may face submission bans.

IASRD is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in all aspects of the submission and peer review process.

Promoting Ethical Research

IASRD is dedicated to upholding the highest standards of research integrity through its publishing activities. Ensuring that research published by IASRD adheres to ethical and fair practices is a key aspect of its mission. Given the diversity of research fields it publishes in, IASRD recognizes the varying standards and methods governing research practices across disciplines.

For research involving human subjects, IASRD expects authors to name the local ethics committee that approved the study or confirm that approval was not required. Authors should also state how the study adheres to recognized ethical standards, such as the Declaration of Helsinki or the US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria may be returned to authors.

Key Areas of Research Integrity

Patient Confidentiality

Studies involving human subjects must protect patient privacy. Journals are encouraged to follow ICMJE guidelines for reporting on human subjects. If detailed patient information is included, a signed consent form from the patient is mandatory. Any identifiers, such as x-rays, MRIs, or photographs, must be anonymized. Written informed consent is required from any potentially identifiable patient or their legal representative and should be noted in the Methods section or Acknowledgments.

Animal Experimentation

Research involving animals must comply with humane treatment standards, such as the ARRIVE guidelines. IASRD endorses the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science guidelines for handling submissions involving animal research. Authors may need to provide evidence of ethical or legal approval for their research.

Registering Clinical Trials

Clinical trials should be registered in publicly accessible databases (e.g., ClinicalTrials.gov). Manuscripts must include the trial registration number and the name of the registry. Some journals may also require clinical trials to adhere to CONSORT guidelines for reporting.

Falsification and Fabrication

Submissions containing false or fabricated data will be returned to the author for explanation. If no satisfactory explanation is provided, the journal may notify the author’s institution, ethics committee, or supervisor. Authors may also be barred from submitting to the journal for a specified period. Examples of falsification include manipulated images, selective omission of data, or fabricated datasets. Some journals employ software to detect image manipulation and falsification. IASRD recognizes that not all cases are deliberate and encourages editors to assess each instance carefully.

 

Terms and Conditions

The person using this website may view, reproduce, or store copies of articles comprising the journal, provided that the articles are used only for personal, non-commercial use. Any use beyond the limitations allowed under the "Fair Dealing" provisions of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or similar provisions under UK law, requires the permission of the publisher.

For permissions to copy beyond those allowed under UK Copyright Law and for reprints, please contact the Copyright Clearance Centre or the publisher directly. The fee code for users of the Transactional Reporting Service appears in each abstract and full-text article.

Any use or reproduction of this Journal in whole or in part must include the customary bibliographic citation, including author attribution, date, article title, journal title, and URL, and MUST include a copy of the copyright notice.

Hard copies of articles, issues, or volumes will be available upon request, and all expenses will be borne by the authors.

Personal accounts and/or passwords are strictly for individual use and must not be shared.