1. Data and reproducibility principles
- methods, sources, instruments, analyses, and limitations must be reported sufficiently for scholarly assessment;
- authors retain research records for a period appropriate to law, ethics approval, consent, institutional policy, and discipline;
- data sharing is encouraged but never requires violation of privacy, consent, cultural restrictions, security, or law;
- editors may request supporting data, instruments, coding frameworks, search strategies, analytic scripts, or raw images confidentially.
2. Data Availability Statement
Every research article must include one of the following, adapted accurately:
3. Study-specific transparency
| Study type | Supporting information expected |
|---|---|
| Quantitative | Instrument, codebook, variable definitions, analysis decisions, software/version, and code where feasible. |
| Qualitative | Interview/topic guide, sampling logic, coding framework, reflexivity, credibility procedures, and appropriate de-identified excerpts. |
| Systematic review | Protocol/registration where available, databases, complete search dates and strings, screening decisions, flow diagram, appraisal, and included-study table. |
| Bibliometric | Database, exact query, search date, export fields, deduplication/cleaning, software/version, parameters, and analysable dataset where licensing permits. |
| Textual/historical | Corpus definition, provenance, inclusion logic, edition/archive details, and analytical framework. |
4. Plagiarism and unacceptable reuse
- verbatim copying without quotation and citation;
- close or misleading paraphrase without adequate attribution;
- appropriation of ideas, data, images, tables, instruments, translations, or structure;
- self-plagiarism or redundant reuse that conceals earlier publication;
- duplicate submission or publication;
- citation of a secondary source as though the original had been consulted;
- invented, altered, unverifiable, or materially misrepresented references.
5. Similarity screening and interpretation
Submissions may be screened with Turnitin or another appropriate tool before or during review. A similarity percentage is not a finding of plagiarism and must not be interpreted mechanically.
Editors assess the source, amount, location, attribution, type of matched material, disciplinary conventions, prior dissemination, and effect on originality. Proper quotations, references, standard methodological phrases, preprints, and an author's disclosed thesis require contextual assessment.
6. Citation integrity
- authors must verify that every reference exists and supports the associated claim;
- relevant primary and current literature should be used where available;
- irrelevant citation padding, coercive citation, reciprocal arrangements, and citation cartels are prohibited;
- reviewers and editors must not request citations primarily to benefit themselves, the journal, or associated publications;
- retracted works must not be used as valid evidence unless the retraction is itself being analysed and clearly identified.
7. Editorial response
Minor attribution or reporting problems may be returned for correction. Material overlap, unreliable data, fabricated references, duplicate publication, or refusal to provide reasonable supporting evidence may lead to rejection or post-publication action.
Suspected misconduct is handled under the Publication Ethics and Corrections policies, with an opportunity for affected parties to respond.