Publication Ethics

Global Academic Frontiers is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication integrity and ethics. This policy is aligned with the core principles and best practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to the following standards.

1. Authorship and Authors’ Responsibilities

  • Authorship Criteria: All listed authors must have made significant intellectual contributions to the research and manuscript preparation, and approve the final version. Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged.

  • Originality and Duplicate Submission: Submissions must be original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere. Submitting the same work concurrently to multiple journals is prohibited.

  • Conflict of Interest: All authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional conflicts of interest that could influence the work or its interpretation, via a submitted disclosure statement.

  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

2. Research Ethics

  • Human Subjects Research: Studies involving human participants must comply with the Declaration of Helsinki. Manuscripts must include:

    • A statement of approval from an Institutional Review Board/Ethics Committee, including the name of the board/committee and approval number.

    • A description of the informed consent process.

    • A description of measures taken to protect participants’ anonymity and data confidentiality.

  • Animal Research: Studies involving animals must follow the ARRIVE Guidelines and provide details of ethical approval from an institutional review board.

  • Data Availability and Reproducibility:

    • Authors are encouraged to make supporting data publicly available.

    • A Data Availability Statement is required in the manuscript, indicating where data can be accessed or justifying any restrictions.

    • Data should be managed to be as FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) as possible.

3. Peer Review Ethics

  • Reviewers’ Responsibilities: Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents, provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback, and declare any conflicts of interest. They must not use unpublished information for personal advantage.

  • Editors’ Responsibilities: Editors ensure a fair, unbiased, and timely peer-review process, protect the anonymity of reviewers, and make editorial decisions based solely on the academic merit, originality, and relevance of the work.

4. Handling of Misconduct and Violations
All allegations of ethical misconduct are taken seriously. The editorial office will investigate following a process informed by COPE flowcharts, which includes an initial assessment, a confidential investigation, and giving the concerned parties a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations.

  • Plagiarism: All submissions are screened for textual overlap. While similarity reports are utilized, each case undergoes editorial examination to distinguish between legitimate textual overlap (e.g., in methods descriptions, standard terminology) and misconduct. Manuscripts with confirmed, unacceptable levels of plagiarism will be rejected or retracted.

  • Data Fabrication and Falsification: Manipulation of research data, images, or findings is a severe violation and will result in immediate rejection or retraction.

  • Redundant Publication: This involves publishing a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published (in any language), without transparent cross-referencing. The appropriateness of overlap is judged by the editorial team based on the extent, nature (e.g., methods vs. results), and citation of the prior work.

  • Citation Manipulation: This refers to the inclusion of citations whose primary purpose is to inflate the citation count of a specific author’s work or articles in a particular journal, rather than to enhance scholarly content. This is distinct from legitimate citation recommendations.

5. Corrections and Retractions
To uphold the integrity of the scholarly record, the journal will take the following actions when warranted:

  • Correction (Erratum): Published for minor errors that do not affect the conclusions or scientific integrity (e.g., typographical errors, incorrect author affiliation). The original article is permanently linked to the correction notice.

  • Retraction: Published when the core findings are deemed unreliable due to major error (e.g., miscalculation) or misconduct (e.g., data fabrication, plagiarism, unethical research). The editorial office will act promptly once a decision is made. The retracted article remains online with a clear “RETRACTED” watermark and is linked to a notice detailing the reasons.

6. Sanctions
Following a thorough investigation and a right of reply for the authors, confirmed violations of this policy may result in sanctions proportionate to the severity of the misconduct. These may include, but are not limited to:

  • Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.

  • A prohibition on new submissions by the involved author(s) to the journal. For a first offense of a moderate nature, this prohibition may typically be applied for 12 to 24 months. For severe or repeated violations, the prohibition may be extended to 36 months or more.

  • Retraction of published articles.

  • In cases of serious reviewer misconduct, removal from the reviewer database and potential notification of their institution.