Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The Journal of Health and Religion (JHR) adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines to address all aspects of publication ethics, especially concerning research and publication misconduct. JHR adopts COPE principles to uphold high ethical standards for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers. Clear communication regarding publication ethics is essential for enhancing the quality of research globally. Below, we outline the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, and reviewers.

 

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

  1. Compliance with Ethical Guidelines: Authors must adhere to the ethical guidelines outlined by JHR when writing and submitting their manuscripts. Unethical practices may lead to severe consequences, including retraction of published articles or bans from future submissions.
  2. Accuracy of Data: Authors should be fully aware of the contents of their submitted manuscripts, ensuring that all presented data are accurate and free from fabrication or fraud.
  3. Originality of Reports: Authors must guarantee the originality of their work; JHR does not accept manuscripts or parts thereof that have been previously published or are under consideration elsewhere. Refer to the journal’s policy on reproducing published material.
  4. Plagiarism: Authors must ensure their reports are plagiarism-free, maintaining a similarity index of no more than 25%.
  5. Availability of Underlying Data: Authors should strive to make their underlying data available. Editors or reviewers may request raw data during evaluation, except for confidential research subject data.
  6. Disclosure of Competing Interests: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and funding sources in a designated section. They should ensure that funders have no role in the experimental design or result interpretation.
  7. Correction of Errors: Authors are responsible for notifying the editors of inaccuracies in their manuscripts before publication and reporting significant errors observed post-publication for correction or possible retraction.

The ethical responsibilities of editors

  1. Compliance with COPE Practices: Editors must follow COPE guidelines when evaluating and deciding on submitted manuscripts.
  2. Judgment Based on Merit: Manuscript evaluations should be based on academic merit (novelty, originality, scientific correctness, and readability) and relevance to JHR's focus. Discrimination based on race, gender, or other biases is not permissible.
  3. Independence from External Influence: Editors should rely on reviewer recommendations rather than government policies or external agencies when making decisions.
  4. Communication with Authors: Editors are responsible for informing authors about the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
  5. Confidentiality: Editors must handle submitted manuscripts with complete confidentiality and prevent disclosure of any information to unauthorized parties.
  6. Respecting Reviewer Requests: Editors must respect authors' requests and not invite certain reviewers based on objective considerations.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a crucial role in upholding the quality of published papers. Ideally, each submitted manuscript undergoes peer review by two independent reviewers chosen for their expertise. The following responsibilities bind reviewers:

  1. Objective Evaluation: Reviewers must perform objective assessments based on scientific merit and publication standards.
  2. Confidentiality: We should treat documents submitted for review as confidential.
  3. Single-Blind Peer Review Policy: Reviewers must not disclose their identities to authors during the review process.
  4. Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide detailed, point-by-point feedback in their reports.
  5. Reviewers should submit their reviews promptly and can request additional time if necessary.
  6. Reporting Misconduct: Reviewers must notify editors of any scientific or ethical misconduct, including indications of plagiarism or data fabrication.

 

Conflicts of Interest

Authors are required to disclose any financial relationships with organizations sponsoring their research in a separate section that comes before the reference list. If no conflict exists, the authors should state this clearly.

To ensure fair evaluation, editors and reviewers should avoid handling manuscripts associated with their institutions, collaborators, co-authors, or competitors. Report any potential conflict of interest to the handling editor.

Ethical Approval Requirements

Experiments involving human or animal subjects require ethical clearance from an institutional review board or ethics committee before commencement. Failure to comply may result in classification as research misconduct.

Human Subjects

The relevant ethics committee must approve all human studies and conduct them according to the ethical standards outlined in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki. All participants must provide informed consent, and authors must omit any identifying details. Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not satisfy these requirements.

Animal Subjects

Reviewers and editors should refer to the ARRIVE guidelines when reviewing manuscripts involving animal research. We urge authors to follow the '3Rs' of animal experimentation: replacement, reduction, and refinement.

Reproducing Published Material from Other Publishers

Authors need permission to reproduce non-public domain or copyrighted material. Permission is required for the following:

  1. You have published your own works without retaining the copyright.
  2. Substantial extracts from any work.
  3. The tables, graphs, charts, and artworks remain unaltered or slightly modified.
  4. Photographs without copyright.

Permission is not required for:

  1. We are reconstructing previously published tables using the cited data sources.
  2. We classify short quotes as fair use.
  3. Original graphs or artworks significantly altered.

Authors should quickly obtain permission to avoid delays in the publication process. JHR cannot publish manuscripts using materials without permission.

 

Publication Misconduct

Publication misconduct encompasses the following: data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and improper authorship.

  • Fabrication is the process of creating false information or nonexistent data.
  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials or data to mislead interpretation.
  • Plagiarism is the act of stealing ideas or content without giving proper credit.
  • Inappropriate Authorship: People who make insufficient contributions receive credit.

Addressing research and publication misconduct

Editors, in collaboration with reviewers, ensure the integrity of published content. COPE guidelines guide the investigation of allegations of misconduct. We will reject manuscripts involving misconduct during the review process, and we may issue retraction notifications for misconduct after publication.

Investigations into allegations will include correspondence with the corresponding author for detailed responses. We may conduct additional expert reviews and address minor issues through letters to the editor, corrections, or clarifications.

Institutions affiliated with authors are responsible for their internal investigations regarding misconduct allegations. The accuracy of scientific content is a shared responsibility among authors, journals, and institutions. Through these measures, the Journal of Health and Religion (JHR) is dedicated to maintaining the integrity and validity of the scientific record.