Policy Statement and Guidelines on Publication Ethics
Review of Integrative Business and Economics Research (RIBER) follows the highest standard of publication ethics and takes all possible procedures against any publication misconduct. GMP Press, the publisher and distributor of RIBER, is fully accountable for the performance and compliance with the following policy and guidelines on publication ethics.
All authors must declare that they have read and agreed to the content of the submitted manuscripts.
GMP Press – the publisher of RIBER – adheres to the publication ethics principles outlined by COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics. RIBER rejects manuscripts that fail to comply with these principles. Authors who are concerned about the editorial process may refer to COPE.
Plagiarism in any form is a serious violation of the basic principles of scholarship and is not tolerated. Examples of plagiarism include:
- Word-by-word copying of portions of someone else's writing without enclosing the copied passage in quotation marks and acknowledging the source in an appropriate scholarly convention.
- The use of a particularly unique term or concept that one has come across in reading without acknowledging the author or source.
- The paraphrasing or abbreviated restatement of someone else's ideas without acknowledging that someone else's text has been the basis for the paraphrasing.
- False citation: material should not be attributed to a source from which it has not been obtained.
- False data: data that has been fabricated or altered in a laboratory or experiment; although not literally plagiarism, this is clearly a form of academic fraud.
- Unacknowledged multiple submission of a paper for several purposes without prior approval from the parties involved.
- Unacknowledged multiple authors or collaboration: the contributions of each author or collaborator should be made clear.
- Self-plagiarism/double submission: the submission of the same or a very similar paper to two or more publications at the same time.
- Medical writers, or anyone else who assisted in the preparation of the manuscript, should be acknowledged in the manuscript, either as an author, or in the Acknowledgements section, as per the guidelines of the European Medical Writers Association. Medical writers should list their source of funding and/or employer.
- Experimental research on humans must have been approved by an appropriate ethics committee and comply with the Helsinki Declaration.
- Informed consent must be documented in cases where information or clinical photographs of human subjects are used. Signed copies of consent forms will be required before an article can be considered for review.
- Authors from pharmaceutical companies or other commercial organizations that sponsor clinical trials should comply with the good practice described at GPP2–Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research.
- These guidelines also apply to companies or individuals that work on industry-sponsored publications, such as freelance writers, contract research organizations and communications companies.
- Experimental research on animals must follow recognized guidelines as presented by the British Society of Animal Research.
Authors must declare all potential competing interests involving people or organizations that might reasonably be perceived as relevant. Competing interests include but are not limited to financial, professional and personal interests, such as:
- Research grants (from any source, restricted or unrestricted).
- Relationships (paid or unpaid) with organizations and funding bodies including nongovernmental organizations, research institutions or charities
- Membership of lobbying or advocacy organizations.
- Personal relationships (i.e. friend, spouse, family member, current or previous mentor, adversary) with individuals involved in the submission or evaluation of a paper, such as authors, reviewers, editors, or members of the editorial board of RIBER.
- Personal convictions (political, religious, ideological, or other) related to a paper's topic that may interfere with an unbiased publication process (at the stage of authorship, peer review, editorial decision making or publication).
for peer reviewers:
- Peer reviewers should declare all potential conflicting interests.
- Peer reviewers should respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process.
- Peer reviewers should provide RIBER's editors with professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.
- Reviewers should identify significant published work that has not been acknowledged by the authors.
- The editor is responsible for maintaining the integrity of RIBER's academic record.
- The editor should mediate all exchanges between authors and peer reviewers during the peer-review process. If agreement cannot be reached, the editor will invite comments from additional peer reviewer(s). The editor’s decision following such an appeal is final.
- The editor should preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards. Editorial independence should be respected. The journal owner should not interfere with editorial decisions. Decisions by the editor about whether to publish individual submissions should not be influenced by pressure from the journal owner.
- The editor should have processes in place to assure the quality of the material published in RIBER.
- The editor guarantees that the entire peer review and publication process are meticulous and objective.
- The editor and board members should never be involved in editorial decisions about their own work.
- The editor should exercise sensitivity when publishing images of objects that might have cultural significance or cause offense.