Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

JPD: Journal of Political and Development Issues  is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal published and managed by PAPSEL Research and Consulting. The journal publishes research articles, conceptual papers, and literature reviews in the fields of political science, governance, public policy, development studies, rural studies, borderland development, and related social sciences.

This statement clarifies the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, the Editor-in-Chief, editors, Editorial Board members, peer reviewers, and the publisher. This statement is based on the principles and best-practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential part of developing a coherent, credible, and respected body of scholarly knowledge. Published articles reflect the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them.

Peer-reviewed publications support the development of scientific knowledge and scholarly discussion. Therefore, all parties involved in the publication process must comply with accepted standards of ethical conduct.

PAPSEL Research and Consulting, as the publisher of the Journal of Political and Development Issues, recognises its responsibility to safeguard the integrity of every stage of the publication process. The publisher is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, publication fees, sponsorship, or other commercial interests do not influence editorial decisions.

Duties of Editors

1. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and assigned editors are responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published.

Editorial decisions are based on:

  • The academic quality of the manuscript;

  • Originality and scholarly contribution;

  • Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope;

  • Methodological soundness;

  • Carity of analysis and argument;

  • Peer-review recommendations; and

  • Compliance with legal and ethical requirements.

Editors may consult other members of the Editorial Board or reviewers when making publication decisions.

Editorial decisions must also comply with applicable legal requirements concerning copyright infringement, plagiarism, defamation, privacy, and other relevant matters.

2. Fairness and Editorial Independence

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual and academic content.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the authors’:

  • Race or ethnicity;

  • Gender or sexual orientation;

  • Religious beliefs;

  • Citizenship or nationality;

  • Institutional affiliation;

  • Political views;

  • Socioeconomic background; or

  • Other personal characteristics.

The publisher must respect the independence of the Editorial Board and must not interfere with editorial decisions for commercial, institutional, personal, or political reasons.

3. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.

Information concerning a manuscript may only be disclosed to:

  • The corresponding author;

  • Assigned reviewers;

  • Prospective reviewers;

  • Members of the Editorial Board;

  • Editorial advisers; and

  • The publisher, where necessary.

Editors must not disclose information about a manuscript to unauthorised parties before publication.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished materials, data, arguments, or ideas contained in a submitted manuscript for their own research or personal benefit without the written consent of the author.

Editors must withdraw from handling a manuscript when they have a personal, professional, institutional, financial, academic, or other conflict of interest.

A manuscript involving an editor, Editorial Board member, or person closely associated with the journal must be handled by another editor who has no conflict of interest.

5. Handling Ethical Concerns

Editors must take reasonable action when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted or published article.

Suspected misconduct may include:

  • Plagiarism;

  • Data fabrication or falsification;

  • Duplicate publication;

  • Inappropriate authorship;

  • Citation manipulation;

  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest;

  • Unethical research involving participants; or

  • Other violations of publication ethics.

Editors must investigate allegations objectively and provide the parties involved with an opportunity to respond.

Where necessary, the journal may issue a correction, retraction, or expression of concern.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making publication decisions and helps authors improve the quality, clarity, and scholarly contribution of their manuscripts.

Reviewers should provide constructive comments that address the strengths, weaknesses, and necessary improvements of the manuscript.

The final publication decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editor.

2. Promptness

A reviewer who feels unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or is unable to complete the review within the specified period must notify the editor promptly and decline the review invitation.

Reviewers should complete their assessments within the agreed timeframe.

When additional time is required, reviewers must communicate with the Section Editor or Editor-in-Chief.

3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

  • Disclose the manuscript to unauthorised individuals;

  • Discuss its content with other parties;

  • Distribute or reproduce the manuscript;

  • Use unpublished data or ideas for personal benefit; or

  • Contact the authors directly without editorial permission.

Consultation with another expert is only permitted with prior approval from the editor.

4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively, professionally, and respectfully.

Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their assessments clearly and support their recommendations with academic arguments.

Reviewer comments should focus on:

  • Originality;

  • Theoretical or conceptual quality;

  • Methodological appropriateness;

  • Validity of the data;

  • Quality of analysis;

  • Carity of discussion;

  • Consistency of conclusions;

  • Relevance of references; and

  • Scholarly contribution.

Discriminatory, insulting, hostile, or personally offensive comments are not permitted.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published studies that have not been cited by the authors.

When a statement, argument, observation, method, or finding has previously been reported, reviewers should recommend the inclusion of an appropriate citation.

Reviewers must also inform the editor if they identify substantial similarities or overlap between the manuscript under review and another published or submitted work.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information and ideas obtained through the peer-review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.

Reviewers must decline manuscripts when they have conflicts of interest resulting from:

  • Competitive relationships;

  • Research collaborations;

  • Institutional relationships;

  • Financial interests;

  • Personal relationships; or

  • Other connections with the authors, organisations, or institutions associated with the manuscript.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must provide an accurate account of the research conducted and an objective discussion of its significance.

The manuscript must present the underlying data honestly and accurately. It should contain sufficient information, methodological explanation, and references to enable readers to understand and, where appropriate, replicate the study.

Fraudulent, fabricated, falsified, manipulated, or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical conduct and are unacceptable.

Authors of review articles must provide an accurate, balanced, and critical assessment of the relevant literature.

2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be requested to provide raw data or supporting materials for editorial examination.

Where ethical, legal, and confidentiality requirements permit, authors are encouraged to make research data publicly accessible.

Authors must retain their research data for a reasonable period after publication and make it available when required for verification.

Data sharing must consider:

  • Participant privacy;

  • Informed consent;

  • Institutional regulations;

  • Intellectual property rights;

  • Confidentiality agreements; and

  • Applicable laws.

3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original works.

When authors use the words, ideas, arguments, data, tables, figures, or other materials of another party, these must be appropriately quoted, cited, and acknowledged.

Plagiarism includes:

  • Copying another person’s work without attribution;

  • Presenting another person’s ideas as one’s own;

  • Using data without acknowledging its source;

  • Closely paraphrasing a source without proper citation;

  • Translating a published work and presenting it as a new work;

  • Using tables or figures without attribution or permission; and

  • Reusing substantial portions of one’s own published work without proper citation.

Manuscripts may be examined using similarity-detection software.

4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

Publishing manuscripts that describe essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication is generally unacceptable.

Authors must disclose any previous publication, conference paper, working paper, preprint, report, or related manuscript that substantially overlaps with the submitted article.

Secondary publication may only be considered when it is academically justified, transparently disclosed, properly cited, and approved by the relevant editors and copyright holders.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must properly acknowledge all publications and sources that have influenced the research.

All quotations, arguments, theories, methods, data, and materials obtained from other sources must be appropriately cited.

Authors must not cite sources that they have not read or use fabricated, inaccurate, or irrelevant references.

Excessive self-citation, coordinated citation, or citation intended solely to manipulate citation indicators is prohibited.

6. Authorship of the Article

Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to:

  • The conception or design of the study;

  • Data collection;

  • Data analysis or interpretation;

  • Drafting the manuscript;

  • Critically revising the manuscript; and

  • Approving the final version.

All individuals who have made significant contributions must be listed as authors. Individuals who contributed to specific aspects of the study but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged as contributors.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

  • All eligible authors are included;

  • Individuals who do not qualify are not listed as authors;

  • All authors have reviewed and approved the final manuscript;

  • All authors agree to the submission;

  • All authors approve revisions; and

  • All authors accept responsibility for the published article.

Changes to the authorship list after submission must be supported by a written explanation and the agreement of all authors.

Guest, honorary, gift, ghost, and purchased authorship are prohibited.

7. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

When research involves hazardous chemicals, procedures, equipment, or materials, authors must clearly identify the relevant risks in the manuscript.

Research involving human participants must respect their rights, dignity, privacy, and safety.

Authors must obtain:

  • Approval from an appropriate ethics committee, where required;

  • Informed consent from participants;

  • Consent for the publication of identifiable information; and

  • Appropriate permission for the use of confidential or sensitive data.

Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international standards for animal welfare.

The manuscript must provide information regarding ethical approval, including the approving institution and approval number, where applicable.

8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial conflicts of interest that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the research findings or interpretation.

Potential conflicts of interest may include:

  • Research funding;

  • Employment;

  • Consultancy;

  • Stock ownership;

  • Honoraria;

  • Patents;

  • Institutional relationships;

  • Personal relationships;

  • Professional competition; or

  • Political involvement.

All sources of financial support must be disclosed in the manuscript.

Where no conflict of interest exists, authors should provide a statement declaring that they have no conflicts of interest.

9. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted or published article, they must promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief or publisher.

Authors must cooperate with the journal to:

  • Correct the article;

  • Provide clarification;

  • Supply supporting data;

  • Issue an erratum or correction; or

  • Retract the article when necessary.

Authors must not conceal errors that may affect the validity, reliability, or interpretation of the published findings.

Duties of the Publisher

PAPSEL Research and Consulting, as the publisher of the Journal of Political and Development Issues, is responsible for supporting the integrity, independence, and sustainability of the journal.

The publisher must:

  1. Protect the independence of editorial decisions;

  2. Ensure that commercial considerations do not influence publication decisions;

  3. Support investigations into publication misconduct;

  4. Assist in issuing corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern;

  5. Protect the confidentiality and personal data of journal users;

  6. Maintain the journal’s online publication system;

  7. Preserve access to published scholarly content; and

  8. Support editors, reviewers, and authors in complying with publication ethics.

The publisher must not interfere with editorial decisions based on commercial, institutional, political, or personal interests.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

The Journal of Political and Development Issues is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

The journal may publish:

  • A Correction when an error affects part of an article but does not invalidate the principal findings;

  • A Retraction when the findings are unreliable because of misconduct or serious error; or

  • An Expression of Concern when serious concerns have been raised but the investigation has not been completed.

Retracted articles will remain accessible in the journal archive with a clear retraction notice to maintain transparency.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other parties may submit complaints regarding:

  • Editorial procedures;

  • Peer-review conduct;

  • Conflicts of interest;

  • Publication decisions;

  • Suspected misconduct; or

  • Violations of journal policies.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a clear academic justification and relevant supporting evidence.

Complaints and appeals will be evaluated fairly by an editor or Editorial Board member who has no conflict of interest in the matter.

Agreement with the Policy

By submitting a manuscript to the Journal of Political and Development Issues, authors confirm that they have read, understood, and agreed to comply with this Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

Violations may result in:

  • Rejection of the manuscript;

  • Withdrawal of manuscript acceptance;

  • Publication of a correction;

  • Retraction of a published article;

  • Notification of the authors’ institution;

  • Temporary restriction on future submissions; or

  • Other appropriate editorial action.