Ethics Policies

The Electronic Journal for Research in Science and Mathematics Education (EJRSME) upholds the standards of publication ethics as outlined in the guidelines set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following policies establish the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

1.      Ethics Guidelines for Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to EJRSME must ensure that their research follows ethical principles as established by COPE guidelines and internationally recognized best practices.

Research Integrity

Authors must present findings truthfully and accurately, ensuring that no data is fabricated, falsified, or manipulated. The research design, methodology, and results must be described in sufficient detail to allow reproducibility and validation by others. Researchers are responsible for ensuring the integrity and accuracy of their work at all stages of the research and publication process.

Authors must ensure that all work is original. The work of others must be properly cited. Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism, is prohibited. Publishing the same or substantially similar content in more than one journal is regarded as self-plagiarism. Manuscripts submitted to EJRSME must not be under consideration elsewhere or previously published.

Data or findings must not be fabricated or altered to mislead readers or reviewers. Upon reasonable request, authors must make their data available to the editors or reviewers in order to substantiate their reports.

Ethical Oversight

Studies involving human participants must comply with national and international ethical standards, such as the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant institutional guidelines. Research reports involving human participants must have gained approval from an appropriate ethics review board and include a statement of oversight in their manuscript.

This information should include the following: 

• the name of the institution, name(s) of the ethics committee(s)/IRB(s), plus the approval number(s)/ID(s), if an approval number was given

 Examples:

• Ethical approval was obtained from the ethics committee at [University of X]
• This study has [X University] Human Research Ethics Committee approval (GU Ref No: 2020/408)

Informed Consent

For studies involving human participants, authors must ensure that participants were fully informed about the purpose, procedures, potential risks, and benefits of the study. Participation in the research study must have been voluntary, with the option to withdraw at any time without consequences. It is the authors’ responsibility to have obtained the proper informed consent documentation for their study, as established by the appropriate ethics review board.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Authors must adhere to the journal’s Generative AI policy. Authors are the guarantors of all text in submitted manuscripts; any fabrications produced by generative artificial intelligence technologies during the preparation of a manuscript will be regarded as instances of misconduct by the authors (see “Research Integrity” and “Misconduct” above).

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Allegations of research misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, unethical experimentation, or data manipulation) will be thoroughly investigated by the editors, in accordance with COPE guidelines. Proven cases of misconduct may result in the rejection of the manuscript, retraction of published work, and/or a ban on future submissions.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. Artificial intelligence technologies cannot be included as authors or contributors to a manuscript. All contributors who meet these criteria should be listed as authors. Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship but provided other support should be acknowledged appropriately. All listed authors must have read and approved the final manuscript before submission. Any changes to the authorship after submission must be justified and approved by all authors.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could influence the research. Examples include funding sources, employment, consultancy, or equity ownership. A statement of conflicts of interest should be included in the manuscript.

Errors, Corrections, and Withdrawals

Authors are responsible for promptly notifying the journal editors if significant errors or inaccuracies are present in their published work. As necessary, authors must coordinate with the editorial team to correct any errors or issue errata.

A published paper may be withdrawn if authors identify significant errors or inaccuracies. The authors must submit a formal request for withdrawal to the editorial, explaining the errors. The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board will evaluate the request and, if approved, the paper will be removed from the journal’s database. The following phrase or similar notice will appear below the paper title on the journal's website: “This paper was withdrawn due to significant technical errors.”

 

 

2.      Responsibilities of Editors

Editors of EJRSME must adhere to the following ethical principles as established by COPE guidelines and internationally recognized best practices.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must be based solely on the manuscript’s academic merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope, without influence from external factors such as personal relationships, political, or financial considerations. Editors must ensure that authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views do not influence the review process or publication decisions.

Editorial decisions must not be affected by any conflicts of interest. If an editor has a conflict of interest (personal, professional, or financial), they must recuse themselves from handling the manuscript and assign it to another editor.

Confidentiality

Editors must ensure that all communications and materials related to the submission and review process are treated confidentially. Editors should only share manuscript information with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial staff, or the publisher, as necessary.

Management of Peer Review

Editors are responsible for selecting suitable and unbiased reviewers with relevant expertise to evaluate manuscripts. Editors must ensure that the peer review process is objective, double-blind, and free from undue influence.

Ensuring Ethical Compliance

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all manuscripts involving human participants comply with ethical guidelines. Editors must ensure that authors provide evidence of ethics committee approval and informed consent.

If allegations of ethical violations (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, double submission) arise, editors must follow COPE guidelines to investigate and address these issues transparently. Authors must be given an opportunity to respond to allegations before decisions are made. If misconduct is confirmed, editors should take appropriate actions, such as issuing corrections, retractions, or removal of the article, and notify relevant parties (e.g., authors, institutions, and publishers). Articles that contain significant errors or ethical violations should be retracted, with a clear explanation provided to the readers.

 

3.      Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers for EJRSME must adhere to the following ethical principles as established by COPE guidelines and internationally recognized best practices.

Reviewer Selection

Reviewers should accept only those manuscripts for review that fall within their area of expertise and for which they feel competent to provide an informed and impartial evaluation. If a reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or cannot provide a review within the stipulated time, they should decline the assignment.

Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the agreed timeframe. If unforeseen delays occur, reviewers must inform the editor as soon as possible to avoid disruptions to the publication process.

Reviewers must alert the editor to any potential ethical concerns, such as plagiarism, duplicate submission, or ethical violations in research practices.

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest, whether financial, personal, or professional, that could compromise their objectivity. If a potential conflict of interest exists, reviewers should decline the assignment and inform the editor.

Preparation of Review

Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and should not be shared or discussed with anyone outside the editorial team, except as authorized by the editor. This includes uploading manuscript documents to any artificial intelligence platforms (see the journal AI policy). Reviewers must not use any information or ideas obtained during the review process for personal gain.

Reviews should be based solely on the manuscript’s scholarly merit, originality, clarity, and contribution to the field. Feedback provided to the authors should be constructive; personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate and unacceptable.

As outlined in the journal AI policy, reviewers may use only use AI technologies to edit their review comments to improve readability, language, or formatting. Using any technology for these purposes requires careful oversight and human review. Reviewers are responsible for the accuracy of the content in their reviews. 

 

4.      Processes for Handling Ethical Concerns with Published Works

If potential ethical violations are identified in published works, allegations will be thoroughly investigated by the editorial team. The authors of the published work will be provided an opportunity to respond.

This process can be initiated due to suspected plagiarism, fraudulent reporting of research, failure to adhere to ethical conduct of research, double publication (publishing the same or very similar paper in multiple journals), or other ethical concerns.

If violations are confirmed, the paper will be retracted from the journal database. The following or similar notice will appear below the paper title on the journal website: “This paper was retracted due to ethical violations.” Authors of the retracted paper will be banned from further submissions to EJRSME.

 

5.      Complaints

Individuals who have concerns regarding the submission, review, or publication process may send a complaint via email to ejrsmejournal@gmail.com. When possible, complaints should be directed to the member of the editorial team with whom the complainant has previously been in contact. Complaints can include, but are not limited to:

• Authorship disputes
• Plagiarism allegations, including self-plagiarism
• Research errors or fraud
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest
• Reviewer bias or harmful conduct

Complaints will be acknowledged within three working days. A full response from the editorial team will be provided within four weeks.