International Journal of Advanced Nursing Education and Research (IJANER) publishes electronic double-blind peer-reviewed international papers dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters and delivering the highest standards of publication ethics.
All papers that do not meet Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement standards will be removed from publication if malpractice is discovered at any time, even after the publication. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, deciding which papers submitted to the journal should be published and preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behaviour is unacceptable, and the journal does not tolerate plagiarism.
All the editors, authors, and reviewers agree upon standards of ethical behavior and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
1. Editors’ Responsibilities
1.1. Editorial Independence and Fair Play
Editors should strive to ensure their journal’s peer review is fair, unbiased, and timely.
Editors must ensure that all submissions are evaluated objectively and solely based on academic merit, disregarding the authors’ ethnic origin, religious beliefs, race, sexual orientation, gender, citizenship, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation.
1.2. Publication Decisions
Editors should be accountable for everything published in the journal and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board’s reviews and the paper’s importance.
Suppose the journal publishes an article criticizing a previous article published by the journal. In that case, the Editors must allow the previous paper’s author(s) to respond to the criticism of their submission, provided that the author(s) response meets the journal’s review criteria.
1.3. Review of Manuscripts
The editor ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated to examine the originality of the manuscript’s contents and ensure the quality of the material, recognizing that manuscripts and sections within manuscripts will have different aims and standards.
1.4. Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
1.5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission. The editors must have no personal, professional, or financial relationship with the authors. Without the author’s permission, the editors may not use unpublished material.
1.6. Potential Issues
The editors will answer questions, ethical concerns, and malpractice complaints as soon as possible and try to resolve the issues responsibly and adequately. Concerns, questions, and complaints about ethical concerns, malpractice complaints, or conflicts of interest can be sent to the editorial team at [email protected].
1.7. Digital Archiving and Access to Journal Content
Editors shall take all reasonable means to ensure that the published issues are securely preserved and that all the journal content is open-access and freely available to everyone.
2. Authors’ Responsibilities
2.1. Authorship
Authorship of the submitted manuscript should be based on the following criteria:
- Authorship should be limited only to those who have contributed significantly to conceiving, designing, executing, and interpreting the submitted study. All those who have contributed considerably to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.
- All authors undertake that their submission does not infringe on any third person’s copyright or any other rights, nor does it contain defamatory, slanderous, libelous, obscene, or other unlawful content. All authors agree that they shall be solely responsible in case of any legal violations.
- Contributors who do not meet all the authorship criteria mentioned above should not be listed as authors. However, they should be acknowledged, and their contributions should be specified.
- After submission, acceptance, or publishing, an author may seek to remove or add author(s). In this case, the author must clearly explain the change and submit a signed statement of agreement.
- In a disagreement over authorship, the journal and its editors will not be held responsible for determining authorship or adjudicating such issues.
The corresponding author’s specific responsibilities include:
- Correction and proofreading of manuscripts. Handling changes and re-submissions of revised papers until the manuscripts are accepted.
- Acting on behalf of all co-authors in responding to post-publication requests from all sources, including issues about publishing ethics, content reuse, and the availability of data, materials, and resources.
2.2. Reporting Standards
Authors should discuss the significance of their original research, presenting it precisely and objectively. Manuscripts are to be edited according to the journal submission guidelines.
- Originality: Authors must certify that their work is unique and original.
- Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to multiple journals is unacceptable and unethical.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: The author (s) should acknowledge all data sources used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.
- Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper and provide it for editorial review upon request of the editor.
- Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted manuscript, the author is requested to notify the editor immediately.
2.3. Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism is unethical and unacceptable in all forms. By submitting a manuscript to the journal, the author(s) guarantee that it is their original work, has not been plagiarized, and does not contain anything that infringes on copyright or other third-party rights. The editorial board should check if plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) in the submission were found or noticed from other sources. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as an intentional thing:
- This should be reported to the editorial board and authors,
- This should be sent to a publisher that published the same or similar paper,
- The paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 6,
- All authors’ names will be marked as a blocklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to the journal for five years.
The author(s) are responsible for acknowledging their sources and providing relevant references in the format specified. Without clear written consent from the concerned third party, any information gained through private sources (such as from discussion or communication with third parties) should not be used or included in the work.
2.4. Conflict of Interest
- Author(s) shall disclose any potential conflict of interest that may exist, whether financial, institutional, personal or any other, which might give the appearance of influence whether in the content of their manuscript or the review process.
- Potential conflicts of interest include, among others, any relationship with an Editor of the Journal, employment, grants, consultancies, representation in a dispute/case, and paid expert testimony.
- The author(s) is responsible for making such disclosures on conflicts of interest to the journal as soon as possible.
2.5. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
- If an author(s) discovers fundamental errors in their work published in the journal, they must immediately notify the journal of such mistakes and cooperate with the journal to rectify them.
- If the editors come to know of such fundamental error(s) in the published work, they shall provide the author an opportunity to prove the correctness of the work. If this is not proved, it shall be the duty of the author to cooperate with the journal to rectify such errors.
- The editorial board has the discretion to decide in what form and manner the error(s) shall be rectified.
2.6. Human-Subjects Protection Policy
Any study involving the use of human subjects must also include informed consent, privacy rights, and full compliance with relevant laws and guidelines to ensure fair and just treatment of participants within the study. A complete and detailed description of such compliance must be outlined within the Methods section of the manuscript. The authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was/would be obtained for the participation of humans in the study.
3. Reviewers’ Responsibilities
3.1. Confidentiality
Manuscript reviewers, editors, and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should guide reviewers on everything expected of them, including the need to handle submitted material confidently.
3.2. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all data sources used in the research. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they know personally.
3.3. Standards of Objectivity
A review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
3.4. Promptness
If a reviewer believes they cannot review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines or the stipulated time, they should notify the editor to ensure an accurate and timely review.
3.5. Conflict of Interest
All reviewers should have no conflict of interest concerning the research, the authors, and the funding bodies.
4. Publishers Responsibility
- The publisher shall take reasonable actions to amend the work in question, in line with the editor’s directions, upon notification by the editor(s) of any confirmed unethical behaviour or malpractice (s). This could include publishing clarifications, corrections, expressions of concern, apologies, or other relevant notes in the journal as soon as possible or retracting the impugned work if it has already been published.
- The publisher must work reasonably with the editor(s) to identify and prevent the publication of unpublished work(s) whose author has been found to have participated in unethical or malpractice behaviour.
5. Change or modification of published paper
5.1. Withdrawal
Papers published will be withdrawn if authors notice significant errors. Before accepting a withdrawal request, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently. If a paper were to be withdrawn,
- The paper in the journal database would be removed,
- The link in the online publication site would be removed,
- The following phrase or a similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in the online publication paper list: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).
5.2. Replacement
Papers published can be replaced if authors send an updated paper. Before accepting a replacement request, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the advances. If a paper were to be replaced,
- The paper in the journal database would be replaced,
- The link in the online publication site would be replaced,
- The following phrase or a similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in the online publication paper list: (This paper was replaced because authors sent an updated version. Contact the editor if you want to check the old version).
- The old version should be kept separately; if someone wants to check the old version, the editor can send the PDF to them.
- However, replacement is acceptable only once and only for technological advances.
5.3. Removal
Papers published will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers, or other subjects notice significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, the editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently and should provide enough time to have authors’ explanations. If a paper were to be withdrawn,
- The paper in the journal database would be removed,
- The link in the online publication site would be removed,
- The following phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in the online publication paper list: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).
6. Penalties
6.1. Double Submission
The editorial board should check the status to see if other sources found or noticed the double submission. If the double submission was confirmed as an intentional thing,
- The review process will be terminated,
- The reason should be sent to reviewers, the editorial board, and authors,
- All authors’ names will be marked as a blocklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to the journals for five years.
6.2. Double Publication
The editorial board should check if other sources found or noticed a double publication. If the double publication was confirmed as an intentional thing,
- This should be reported to the editorial board and authors,
- This should be sent to a publisher that published the same (or very similar) paper,
- The paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 6,
- All authors’ names will be marked as a blocklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to the journal for five years.
7. Article Correction Policy
IJANER allows its authors to correct mistakes, typographical errors, or other inaccuracies after publishing their manuscript.
The Editorial Board is ready to make the following types of corrections:
- The addendum is published in case some important information, data, or results were unintentionally omitted from the article, i.e., author’s affiliation, grant number, funding, research subject or method, etc.
- Erratum is a correction of formatting or other unscientific change to something that causes ambiguity, hinders understanding, or prevents correct citing, e.g., spelling or factual error in the title or author’s name, affiliation, e-mail, etc., missing or fuzzy figures, missing or misspelled words; a typo in the formula or its explanation, etc. The Erratum is made in the digital version, and a message about the Erratum is published on the website and in the current printed issue. Minor errors that do not hinder the meaning or understanding are not corrected, and no Erratum is published.
- Corrections are changes that may affect the scientific interpretation, e.g., incorrect data, extra text, wrong information in equations, conclusions, etc. The Reviewer evaluates these changes, and the final decision on making Corrections belongs to the Chief Editor. The Corrections are published in the current issue as a separate publication referencing the original article. The original article is not modified but requires a hyperlink to the correction.