Educational Methods & Psychometrics (EMP)

ISSN: 2943-873X

Publication Ethics and Policies

Statement on Publication Ethics and Unethical Conduct in Publishing

Educational Methods and Psychometrics (EMP) is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. The editorial team of the EMP is deeply concerned about the growing instances of plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct in scholarly publishing. It is our ethical duty as editors to acknowledge these challenges and devise strategies to address them. We also expect our peer reviewers to share this awareness.

All research papers submitted to EMP undergo a rigorous editorial internal review and a double-blind peer-review process involving a minimum of two reviewers. Furthermore, EMP is committed to upholding ethical standards in its own editorial policy. Our editors are dedicated to ensuring a fair, impartial, and transparent peer review process, as well as making unbiased editorial decisions.

Should any instances of misconduct be identified, whether involving authors, reviewers, or editors, we will diligently pursue appropriate actions. The EMP remains steadfast in its commitment to upholding the highest ethical standards. A comprehensive policy outlining EMP’s publication ethics for authors, editors, and reviewers, along with a malpractice statement based on the ethical guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), is provided in the following section.

Ethical Expectations

Duties of Authors:

1) Reporting Principles

Authors of the original work should provide a thorough account of their research, accompanied by an unbiased discussion of its significance. It is the researcher's duty to systematically disclose all information related to the study, including data and participant details (such as population, sample, and sampling methods) to facilitate replication by other researchers. Deceptive or inaccurate statements, which constitute unethical behavior, are not acceptable.

2) Data Submission and Management

The raw data from the paper should be made available for editorial review upon reasonable request, either before or after publication. If appropriate and in accordance with the author's or employer's policies, the data should be deposited in a suitable storage location for sharing and potential use by others.

3) Originality, Plagiarism, and Simultaneous Publication

EMP is vigilant about copyright violations and plagiarism, aiming to investigate any instances of misuse of published articles to protect authors' rights and the journal's reputation. Therefore, authors must ensure that their articles are entirely original, appropriately citing or quoting the work of others if used. Furthermore, authors should confirm that the submitted manuscript is not under consideration or accepted for publication elsewhere, as EMP does not allow the submission of a manuscript that has been published, in whole or in part, by another journal. If a paper is found to contain plagiarism or unauthorized third-party content without proper acknowledgment, and if there are questions about authorship, EMP reserves the right to retract the article, consult with the author's institution's head or dean, or take other appropriate legal action.

4) Citation of Sources

Proper acknowledgment and citation of others' publications are always required. Additionally, any privately obtained data (e.g., conversations, correspondence, discussions with third parties) and confidential services data (e.g., manuscript reviewing or grant applications) must be reported with accurate written permission from the source.

5) Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the article's conception, design, execution, or interpretation. Other contributors who do not meet authorship criteria but have played important roles in the research project should be acknowledged in a separate section. The final version of the paper and its submission for publication should receive approval from the corresponding author and all co-authors.

6) Hazards and Informed Consent

Papers involving chemicals, procedures, or tools with potential hazards or risks must explicitly identify these in the manuscript. Studies involving human subjects must state that all procedures adhered to relevant laws and institutional guidelines and received approval from the appropriate Ethics or Institutional Committees. For experiments involving human subjects, the manuscript should include information about whether participants provided written or verbal informed consent.

7) Disclosure of Conflicting Interests

Any financial, commercial, or other substantial conflicts of interest that could influence the article's results or interpretation (e.g., employment, consultancy fees, payments, grants, paid expert testimony, applications/registrations, or other funding) should be promptly disclosed to the Editor at the earliest opportunity.

8) Correction of Significant Errors in Published Works

Authors should promptly report significant errors or oversights in their published work as soon as they become aware of them in order to rectify the paper. It is the responsibility of the author to cooperate with the editor and publisher to publish corrections such as errata, addenda, corrigenda, or to retract the paper when necessary.

Duties of Reviewers:

1) Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers play a crucial role in the scientific method and scholarly communication by assisting the editor and authors in making editorial decisions promptly and enhancing the paper through effective editorial communication.

2) Timeliness

Reviewers or referees who are unable to promptly assess a manuscript or believe they lack the necessary qualifications should inform the editor and gracefully withdraw from the review process.

3) Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review must be handled as confidential documents, and reviewers must not display, retain, copy, or discuss them with others without the explicit consent of the editor-in-chief.

4) Objective Evaluation

Reviewers should conduct their assessments objectively and impartially, articulating their opinions clearly without imposing personal biases.

5) Proper Attribution of Sources

Reviewers are responsible for correctly citing any previously published work (observations, derivations, arguments, discussions, etc.). They should also inform the Editor of any potential overlap between the manuscript under review and other known published materials.

6) Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the materials received for review and refrain from using any part of the content (published or unpublished) or other information obtained through the review process in their own research or for personal gain without the author's explicit permission. Additionally, reviewers should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from connections with the authors or institutions, competitive or collaborative relationships, or financial interests.

Duties of Editors:

1) Editorial Decision-Making

The primary responsibility for determining which of the submitted articles should be considered for publication in a peer-reviewed journal lies with the journal's editor. This decision-making process, conducted in a timely manner, involves guidance from the journal's editorial board and other relevant stakeholders. Articles are typically evaluated based on the validation of their content, their significance to the research community and readers, as well as ethical considerations, such as copyright infringement and plagiarism.

2) Impartial Evaluation

Manuscripts should be subjected to a fair and objective evaluation process, focusing solely on their scholarly content. Irrespective of the author's background, nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, commercial affiliations, or political beliefs, the assessment should be impartial.

3) Maintaining Confidentiality

Information pertaining to submitted articles is regarded as confidential and should not be disclosed, retained, or duplicated by anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher.

4) Disclosure and Management of Conflicts of Interest

As all received manuscripts for review are treated as confidential materials, editors are prohibited from utilizing any part of these materials, whether published or unpublished, or any other information acquired during the peer-review process for personal research or gain. In cases where editors have conflicts of interest related to authors or institutions, or if there are competitive or collaborative concerns, they should recuse themselves from the review process and instead delegate it to a co-editor or another member of the editorial board. Furthermore, editors must request all contributors to disclose their relevant interests, and any discovered competing interests after publication should lead to appropriate actions, such as modifications, retractions, or expressions of concern. Editors are also responsible for ensuring that the peer-review process for sponsored manuscripts adheres to the same standards as other manuscripts and is in accordance with the journal's policies. Sponsored manuscripts should be accepted based solely on their academic merit and appeal to readers, free from commercial influences.

5) Handling Complaints

The journal follows a logical, equitable, and objective procedure when addressing complaints of an ethical or conflictual nature, in accordance with the journal's and society's policies as applicable. If a complaint concerns one of the journal's authors, the editor will initiate contact with the implicated author and provide them with a reasonable opportunity to respond. The editor's decision regarding the complaint may take into account the author's response, if responsive and substantiated, as well as input from the opposing party.

6) Participation and Cooperation in Investigations

The ethical concerns surrounding a submitted manuscript or published paper should be assessed by the editor using appropriate and responsive measures. This may involve communication with the paper's author or reaching out to relevant institutions or research bodies. Every instance of unethical publishing behavior should be taken seriously and investigated thoroughly, potentially resulting in actions like corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern, even if the unethical act is discovered years after publication.

Duties of the Publisher:

The EMP ensures that it upholds the standards outlined above and maintains good practices in the field.

Actions for Addressing Unethical Behavior

Detecting Unethical Conduct

  • Any instance of malpractice or unethical behavior should be promptly acknowledged and reported to the editor or publisher, with the reporting party being open to supplying substantial evidence to initiate an investigation.

Investigation Process

  • The editor is entrusted with launching an investigation into the alleged misconduct. Decisions are made by the editor, who may seek counsel from the publisher if deemed necessary, while ensuring that allegations remain confidential within the relevant parties.

Handling Violations and Consequences (in ascending order of seriousness; these actions can be applied individually or in combination)

  • Minor breaches will be resolved discreetly, typically through educational efforts to address any misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards by the author or reviewer.
  • In cases of minor misconduct, formal actions such as a retraction or withdrawal of the publication may be taken.
  • Authors may face a temporary ban from contributing in more serious misconduct cases.
  • In instances of severe misconduct, the accused party's employers could be notified, or a formal notice outlining the misconduct may be published.
  • A formal letter may be dispatched to the author's or reviewer's department head or funding agency.
  • Reporting the case and its outcome to a professional organization or higher authority for further investigation and action is a possibility.
  • Throughout this process, the accused author should be given an opportunity to respond to any allegations made.

Policies of EMP Regarding:

Withdrawal of Articles

For articles "In Press" (accepted for publication but not yet formally published) that breach ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, false authorship claims, plagiarism, or accidental duplication, they may be "Withdrawn" from the RTBLE Journal. This involves replacing the article's HTML and PDF content with a page announcing the article's withdrawal, following the EMP's Policy on Article Withdrawal.

Retraction of Articles

Retractions of articles, whether initiated by authors or the editor, aim to rectify submission or publication errors. A signed retraction note, titled "Retraction: [article title]," is published in the following issue and listed in the contents, while the HTML version of the document is removed.

Concerns Regarding Authorship

It is imperative to attribute the contribution of every author as an "author." To qualify as an author, an individual must have made a significant contribution to the research's conception, design, implementation, or interpretation. All authors must be able to publicly defend the paper, and the responsibility lies with the submitting author to identify all co-authors.

Duplicate Concurrent Publication/Simultaneous Submission

Submitted articles must be original and not simultaneously under consideration by other publications. Submitting multiple works to the EMP at the same time is not allowed.