Publication Ethics Policy

IRJPL is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and accountability in scholarly publishing while ensuring that all ethical concerns are addressed fairly, consistently, and in accordance with international best practices to protect the integrity of the scholarly record. The publisher strictly follows internationally recognized ethical frameworks, including the guidelines and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA).

Ethical Principles

All parties involved in the publication process—including authors, reviewers, and editors—are expected to adhere to the principles of:

  • Academic honesty and research integrity
  • Transparency in methodology, data reporting, and authorship
  • Fair and unbiased editorial decision-making
  • Confidentiality throughout the peer review process
  • Accountability for published content

These principles apply uniformly across all journals published under IRJPL without exception.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are required to ensure that:

  • Submitted work is original and not previously published or under consideration elsewhere
  • All data, findings, and interpretations are accurate and honestly presented
  • All sources are properly cited and acknowledged
  • All listed authors meet accepted authorship criteria (ICMJE guidelines)
  • All conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are fully disclosed
  • Ethical approval has been obtained for studies involving humans or animals where applicable

Responsibilities of Reviewers and Editors

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, provide objective and constructive feedback, and avoid any conflicts of interest. Editors are responsible for ensuring fair peer review, unbiased decision-making, and adherence to ethical publishing standards. Editorial decisions are based solely on academic merit and peer review outcomes.

Research Misconduct

IRJPL defines research misconduct in alignment with COPE standards. This includes, but is not limited to:

  • Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism or redundant publication)
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Duplicate or redundant publication
  • Improper or unethical authorship practices (including ghost, guest, or gift authorship)
  • Citation manipulation or coercive citation practices
  • Image manipulation or selective data reporting
  • Failure to disclose conflicts of interest
  • Ethical violations in human or animal research

Investigation and Action Process

All allegations or suspicions of ethical misconduct are taken seriously and handled through a structured review process based on COPE flowcharts. The process includes:

  1. Preliminary Assessment: Initial evaluation of the concern by the editorial office
  2. Author Communication: Authors are contacted for clarification and supporting documentation
  3. Expert or Editorial Review: Additional editorial or peer input may be requested
  4. Institutional Involvement (if required): Cases may be escalated to affiliated institutions or ethics committees
  5. Final Decision: Based on evidence, a final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief

Possible Editorial Actions

Depending on the severity and nature of the violation, IRJPL may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Rejection of the manuscript during review
  • Request for revision or correction
  • Publication of a formal correction notice
  • Retraction of published articles
  • Publication of an expression of concern
  • Notification to authors’ institutions or funding bodies