Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

The publication of scholarly work in EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review is an essential part of the development of a credible, transparent, and accountable body of academic knowledge. The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and research integrity throughout the editorial and publication process.

This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement applies to all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, editorial board members, peer reviewers, and the publisher.

EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review is guided by internationally recognised principles and best practices in scholarly publishing, particularly those concerning publication ethics, research integrity, transparency, authorship, peer review, conflicts of interest, correction, and retraction.

Editorial decisions are based exclusively on scholarly merit, relevance to the journal's focus and scope, methodological and theoretical quality, originality, ethical compliance, and contribution to knowledge. Commercial considerations, advertising, publication fees, sponsorship, institutional relationships, or other financial interests shall not influence editorial decisions.

2. Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

2.1 Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and designated editors are responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication.

Editorial decisions shall be based on:

  • originality and scholarly significance;

  • relevance to the journal's focus and scope;

  • theoretical and/or practical contribution;

  • methodological rigour;

  • validity and clarity of the findings;

  • compliance with research and publication ethics;

  • peer-review reports; and

  • applicable legal requirements concerning copyright, plagiarism, defamation, confidentiality, and research integrity.

Editors may consult other editors, editorial board members, or independent reviewers when necessary.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal and is not determined solely by reviewers' recommendations.

2.2 Fair and Impartial Evaluation

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit and relevance, without discrimination based on race, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, age, religious belief, institutional affiliation, political philosophy, or other personal characteristics unrelated to the scholarly quality of the manuscript.

2.3 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff shall maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and related correspondence.

Information concerning a submitted manuscript shall not be disclosed to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, relevant editorial advisers, and the publisher when necessary for legitimate editorial purposes.

2.4 Editorial Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect their impartiality.

An editor shall not handle a manuscript when they:

  • are an author or co-author of the manuscript;

  • have a close personal, professional, supervisory, financial, institutional, or collaborative relationship with an author;

  • have a direct competitive interest in the research; or

  • have any other relationship that may reasonably compromise editorial independence.

In such cases, responsibility for the manuscript shall be assigned to another qualified editor who has no relevant conflict of interest.

Manuscripts submitted by editors or members of the editorial board shall undergo the same editorial and peer-review standards as other submissions, with independent editorial oversight.

2.5 Unpublished Materials

Unpublished information, ideas, data, or materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by editors for their own research or personal advantage without the explicit written permission of the authors.

2.6 Editorial Independence

The publisher shall respect the editorial independence of the journal.

Editorial decisions shall not be influenced by publication charges, advertising, sponsorship, institutional interests, personal relationships, or other commercial considerations.

3. Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

3.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in evaluating the scholarly quality, originality, validity, relevance, and significance of submitted manuscripts.

Constructive reviewer comments should also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

3.2 Promptness

A reviewer who considers themselves insufficiently qualified to review a manuscript or who cannot complete the review within the requested period should promptly notify the editor and decline the review invitation.

3.3 Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers shall not:

  • share the manuscript with unauthorised persons;

  • discuss its contents outside the review process;

  • use unpublished information for personal benefit;

  • distribute, copy, or retain manuscript materials unnecessarily; or

  • upload confidential manuscript content to publicly accessible artificial intelligence or other third-party systems that could compromise confidentiality.

3.4 Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively, professionally, respectfully, and constructively.

Personal criticism, discriminatory remarks, hostile language, or comments unrelated to the academic quality of the manuscript are unacceptable.

Reviewers should provide clear arguments and, where appropriate, supporting evidence for their recommendations.

3.5 Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant scholarly works that have not been appropriately cited where such works are directly relevant to the manuscript.

Reviewers should also inform the editor when they identify substantial similarity, plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate citation practices, data irregularities, or other potential research or publication misconduct.

3.6 Reviewer Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest before accepting a review assignment.

Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where conflicts arise from:

  • recent or ongoing collaboration with the authors;

  • direct academic competition;

  • personal or professional relationships;

  • supervisory relationships;

  • institutional affiliation;

  • financial interests; or

  • any circumstance that may compromise impartiality.

3.7 Reviewer Misconduct

Reviewer misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • breaching manuscript confidentiality;

  • misappropriating ideas or data;

  • deliberately delaying the review process;

  • providing false or misleading information;

  • impersonating another reviewer;

  • manipulating citations;

  • coercing authors to cite unnecessary publications;

  • providing discriminatory or abusive reviews; and

  • reviewing a manuscript despite an undisclosed conflict of interest.

Suspected reviewer misconduct will be investigated by the editorial team. Depending on the seriousness of the case, actions may include removal from the reviewer database, rejection of the review report, notification of relevant institutions, or other appropriate corrective measures.

4. Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

4.1 Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate, honest, transparent, and sufficiently detailed account of the research performed.

Research methods, analyses, findings, interpretations, and conclusions must be reported accurately and must not intentionally mislead readers.

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

4.2 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts represent original scholarly work.

Where the work, ideas, data, figures, tables, words, or other intellectual contributions of others are used, appropriate citation, quotation, attribution, and permission must be provided.

Plagiarism in any form, including direct plagiarism, inappropriate paraphrasing, mosaic plagiarism, and the unattributed use of another person's ideas or materials, is unacceptable.

The journal may use similarity-detection software as part of its editorial screening process.

Similarity reports shall be interpreted by editors contextually and shall not be treated solely as numerical indicators of plagiarism.

4.3 Data Fabrication and Falsification

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, selectively manipulate, omit, or misrepresent research data, images, observations, analyses, or findings.

Data fabrication includes the creation of data or results that did not occur.

Data falsification includes manipulation, alteration, omission, suppression, or misrepresentation of research materials, processes, data, images, or results in a manner that distorts the research record.

Where credible evidence of fabrication or falsification is identified, the journal may reject the manuscript, retract a published article, notify the authors' institutions, or undertake other appropriate actions.

4.4 Multiple, Redundant, and Duplicate Publication

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

Authors should also not publish substantially the same research in multiple publications without appropriate justification, cross-referencing, transparency, and editorial approval.

Duplicate publication, redundant publication, inappropriate text recycling, and unjustified fragmentation of a single study into multiple publications ("salami publication") may constitute publication misconduct.

Authors must inform the editor of closely related manuscripts that have been published, submitted, or are under consideration elsewhere.

4.5 Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must appropriately acknowledge all sources that have materially influenced the research.

Citations should be academically relevant and should not be added solely to manipulate citation metrics.

Citation manipulation, citation cartels, coercive citation, or intentionally misleading citation practices are prohibited.

4.6 Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the work and who are able to take appropriate responsibility for its content.

All listed authors must:

  • have made a meaningful intellectual contribution to the work;

  • have reviewed and approved the final manuscript;

  • agree to its submission for publication; and

  • accept accountability for their respective contributions.

Gift authorship, guest authorship, honorary authorship, purchased authorship, and ghost authorship are unacceptable.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should, where appropriate and with their permission, be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is accurate, that all legitimate authors are included, that inappropriate authors are excluded, and that all co-authors have approved the submitted version.

4.7 Author Contributions and CRediT

Authors are required to provide an Author Contributions Statement describing each author's contribution to the manuscript.

Where appropriate, the journal encourages the use of the CRediT (Contributor Role Taxonomy), including relevant roles such as:

  • Conceptualization;

  • Methodology;

  • Software;

  • Validation;

  • Formal Analysis;

  • Investigation;

  • Resources;

  • Data Curation;

  • Writing – Original Draft;

  • Writing – Review & Editing;

  • Visualization;

  • Supervision;

  • Project Administration; and

  • Funding Acquisition.

The contribution statement does not replace the journal's authorship requirements.

5. Authorship Changes and Authorship Disputes

Any request to add, remove, or rearrange authors after initial submission must be accompanied by:

  • a clear explanation for the requested change; and

  • written agreement from all affected authors.

Changes to authorship after acceptance will only be permitted in exceptional and properly justified circumstances.

The journal will not arbitrarily adjudicate complex authorship disputes that require institutional investigation.

Where an authorship dispute cannot be resolved through documented agreement among the authors, the journal may suspend editorial consideration and refer the matter to the relevant institution, research integrity office, employer, or other competent authority.

Editorial processing may resume after the journal receives an appropriate institutional determination.

6. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical principles, institutional requirements, and relevant national or international regulations.

Where required, authors must obtain approval or exemption from an appropriate institutional ethics committee or research ethics board before conducting the research.

For relevant manuscripts, authors must provide an Ethics Approval and Informed Consent Statement that includes, where applicable:

  • the name of the approving ethics committee or institutional review board;

  • the approval or reference number, where available;

  • confirmation that the research was conducted in accordance with applicable ethical standards; and

  • information regarding informed consent.

If formal ethics approval was not required, authors should clearly state the reason and, where applicable, identify the institutional or regulatory basis for the exemption.

7. Research Involving Children, Minors, and Vulnerable Participants

Research involving children, minors, students, persons with limited decision-making capacity, or other potentially vulnerable participants requires particular ethical care.

Authors must ensure that appropriate ethical approval has been obtained where required.

For research involving minors, informed consent should normally be obtained from a parent, legal guardian, or other legally authorised representative, together with the participant's assent where appropriate to their age, maturity, and applicable ethical requirements.

Authors must protect participants' privacy, confidentiality, dignity, and welfare.

Personally identifiable information, photographs, videos, case descriptions, or other materials that could identify participants must not be published without appropriate consent or other valid ethical and legal justification.

8. Informed Consent

Where informed consent is required, authors must confirm that participants voluntarily agreed to participate after receiving adequate information about the research.

Separate consent may be necessary for the publication of personally identifiable information, images, recordings, case material, or sensitive personal information.

Authors are responsible for retaining appropriate documentation of consent where required.

9. Research Involving Animals

Where research involves animals, authors must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international standards concerning animal welfare.

Authors should provide information regarding ethical approval, licensing, or institutional oversight where applicable.

Researchers must make reasonable efforts to minimise unnecessary harm, distress, and suffering.

10. Data Access, Retention, and Research Transparency

Authors are responsible for maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the data underlying their publications.

Authors should retain research data for an appropriate period in accordance with institutional, disciplinary, legal, ethical, and funder requirements.

Editors may request underlying data, research instruments, analytical outputs, documentation, ethics approvals, or other relevant materials when necessary to assess the integrity of a manuscript.

Failure to provide requested supporting information without reasonable justification may result in suspension of the review process, rejection, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

11. Data Availability Statement

For applicable research articles, authors should include a Data Availability Statement explaining whether and how the data supporting the findings can be accessed.

Examples include:

  • data are publicly available in a recognised repository;

  • data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request;

  • data are restricted because of ethical, legal, privacy, confidentiality, or contractual limitations;

  • all relevant data are included in the article and supplementary materials; or

  • no new data were created or analysed for the study.

Where data cannot be made publicly available, authors should explain the reason for the restriction.

12. Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships or interests that could reasonably be perceived to influence the conduct, interpretation, or reporting of their research.

A Conflict of Interest Statement must be included in every article.

Where no conflict exists, authors should explicitly state:

“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

Editors and reviewers are also required to disclose relevant conflicts of interest and must withdraw from handling manuscripts when their impartiality could reasonably be questioned.

13. Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose all financial support received for the research and/or publication of the article.

The Funding Statement should include, where applicable:

  • the name of the funding organisation;

  • grant or project number; and

  • the role of the funder in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions.

Where no external funding was received, authors should state:

“This research received no external funding.”

14. Acknowledgments

Individuals, institutions, organisations, or other parties who contributed to the research but do not meet the requirements for authorship may be recognised in the Acknowledgments section.

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission from individuals who are identified in the acknowledgments where appropriate.

Financial support must not be concealed solely within the acknowledgments and should also be reported in the Funding Statement.

15. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Authors must disclose the use of generative artificial intelligence (Generative AI), large language models, or AI-assisted technologies when such tools have materially contributed to manuscript preparation, analysis, interpretation, translation, coding, image generation, or other substantive aspects of the research or publication.

Artificial intelligence systems or tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because authorship requires human accountability and responsibility.

Authors remain fully responsible for:

  • the accuracy of all submitted content;

  • verifying factual claims and references;

  • ensuring that AI-generated content does not contain fabricated citations or information;

  • protecting confidential, sensitive, copyrighted, or personal data;

  • ensuring originality and proper attribution; and

  • complying with research and publication ethics.

Where Generative AI has been used substantively, authors should provide a transparent statement identifying, where relevant:

  • the tool used;

  • the purpose for which it was used; and

  • the extent of its contribution.

Routine tools used solely for spelling, grammar, formatting, or reference management generally do not require detailed disclosure unless their use materially changes the scholarly content.

Generative AI must not be used to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent data, results, images, citations, participant responses, or scholarly evidence.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished manuscript materials to external Generative AI platforms when doing so could compromise confidentiality, privacy, copyright, or data protection.

16. Required Declarations in Published Articles

Where applicable, manuscripts submitted to EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review should contain the following declarations before the References section or in another location specified by the journal template:

Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

Authors should provide information regarding ethical approval and informed consent where required. If ethics approval was not applicable or required, this should be clearly stated.

Conflict of Interest

All authors must disclose relevant conflicts of interest. If none exist:

“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

Funding

Authors must identify all sources of funding. If no external funding was received:

“This research received no external funding.”

Author Contributions / CRediT

Authors should describe their individual contributions, preferably using the CRediT taxonomy where appropriate.

Data Availability Statement

Authors should explain whether and under what conditions the supporting data are available.

Acknowledgments

Authors should acknowledge non-author contributions and relevant institutional or technical support where applicable.

Use of Generative AI

Authors must disclose substantive use of Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies. Where none were used, the journal may require authors to state:

“The authors declare that no Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies were used in the preparation of this manuscript.”

17. Research and Publication Misconduct

The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously.

Potential misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • plagiarism;

  • data fabrication;

  • data falsification;

  • image manipulation;

  • duplicate or redundant publication;

  • simultaneous submission;

  • citation manipulation;

  • peer-review manipulation;

  • fabricated reviewer identities;

  • inappropriate authorship;

  • ghost, guest, gift, or purchased authorship;

  • undisclosed conflicts of interest;

  • unethical research involving human participants or animals;

  • misrepresentation of ethics approval or informed consent;

  • manipulation of the editorial process;

  • misuse of confidential manuscript information; and

  • inappropriate or undisclosed use of artificial intelligence.

Suspected misconduct may be investigated before or after publication.

The journal may request explanations, original data, ethics documentation, authorship documentation, research records, or other supporting evidence from authors.

Where necessary, the journal may contact relevant institutions, research integrity offices, ethics committees, funders, other journals, publishers, or competent authorities.

The journal will seek to conduct investigations fairly, confidentially, objectively, and with appropriate opportunity for affected parties to respond.

18. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

Submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism or similarity-detection software.

A similarity percentage alone does not establish whether plagiarism has occurred. Editorial evaluation will consider the nature, extent, context, source, and attribution of the overlapping material.

Manuscripts containing substantial unattributed material, inappropriate text recycling, fabricated citations, or other serious originality concerns may be returned for revision or rejected.

Cases discovered after publication may result in a correction, retraction, or other appropriate editorial action depending on the seriousness of the problem.

19. Corrections and Post-Publication Amendments

EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review is committed to maintaining the integrity and accuracy of the scholarly record.

Where an error is identified after publication, the journal will determine whether the issue requires a correction, erratum, corrigendum, retraction, expression of concern, or another appropriate post-publication notice.

Post-publication notices should be clearly identified and linked to the original article wherever technically possible.

19.1 Correction

A correction may be published when an error affects part of the article but does not invalidate the overall findings, reliability, or conclusions of the work.

19.2 Erratum

An erratum may be issued when a significant error was introduced during the journal's production, editing, typesetting, or publication process.

19.3 Corrigendum

A corrigendum may be issued when authors identify a significant error originating from the authors that does not invalidate the central findings or conclusions of the article.

Minor typographical or formatting errors that do not affect meaning or interpretation may not require a formal correction notice.

20. Retraction

An article may be retracted when there is reliable evidence that its findings or publication record are seriously compromised.

Grounds for retraction may include:

  • major data fabrication or falsification;

  • serious plagiarism;

  • duplicate publication;

  • unethical research;

  • fraudulent peer review;

  • serious authorship misconduct;

  • major errors that invalidate the conclusions;

  • manipulation of the publication process; or

  • other serious breaches of research or publication integrity.

Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record and protect readers rather than merely punish authors.

A retraction notice should clearly identify the affected article, explain the reason for the retraction to the extent appropriate, and remain permanently accessible.

Where technically possible, the original article should remain available as part of the scholarly record but be clearly identified as retracted.

21. Expression of Concern

The journal may publish an Expression of Concern when serious questions have been raised about a published article but the evidence available is not yet sufficient to determine whether correction or retraction is warranted.

An Expression of Concern may be appropriate when:

  • an investigation is ongoing;

  • relevant institutions have not yet reached a conclusion;

  • evidence concerning misconduct is inconclusive;

  • authors or institutions are unable or unwilling to provide necessary information; or

  • a potentially serious issue requires readers to be alerted while further investigation continues.

Following resolution of the matter, the Expression of Concern may be followed by a correction, retraction, or other appropriate notice.

22. Complaints

The journal welcomes legitimate complaints concerning its editorial processes, publication ethics, peer review, editorial conduct, published content, or other matters within the journal's responsibility.

Complaints should be submitted through the journal's official contact channel and should include sufficient information and supporting evidence to allow the matter to be evaluated.

Complaints concerning an editor will be handled by another editor, the Editor-in-Chief, or the publisher as appropriate, provided that the person handling the complaint has no relevant conflict of interest.

Complaints will be considered objectively, confidentially, and fairly.

Anonymous complaints may be considered when they contain specific, verifiable, and credible evidence.

23. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, ethical, or scholarly error affected the decision.

An appeal should:

  • clearly identify the manuscript concerned;

  • explain the specific grounds for the appeal;

  • address the relevant editorial or reviewer comments; and

  • provide evidence supporting reconsideration.

An appeal is not intended merely to express disagreement with an editorial decision.

Where practicable, the appeal should be evaluated by an editor who was not substantially involved in the original decision or by another qualified member of the editorial team.

The outcome of the journal's formal appeal process constitutes the journal's final editorial decision unless new and substantive evidence becomes available.

24. Fundamental Errors Identified by Authors

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal and cooperate with the editorial team in determining the appropriate corrective action.

Depending on the seriousness of the error, this may involve:

  • a correction;

  • corrigendum;

  • retraction; or

  • another appropriate amendment to the publication record.

Authors must cooperate in providing documentation, original data, or other information reasonably required to assess the issue.

25. Post-Publication Discussions and Concerns

Readers, researchers, reviewers, and other stakeholders may report credible concerns regarding published articles.

The journal will consider evidence-based concerns relating to:

  • data reliability;

  • plagiarism;

  • research ethics;

  • authorship;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • image or data manipulation;

  • duplicate publication;

  • undisclosed AI use;

  • methodological integrity; or

  • other matters affecting the reliability of the scholarly record.

Concerns will be assessed according to their seriousness and supporting evidence.

Where appropriate, authors will be given an opportunity to respond before a final editorial action is taken.

26. Duties of the Publisher

The publisher supports the editorial independence and research integrity policies of EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review.

The publisher shall:

  • respect independent editorial decision-making;

  • support the investigation of ethical concerns;

  • maintain the integrity of published records;

  • support the publication of corrections, retractions, and other notices where necessary;

  • protect editorial confidentiality;

  • avoid commercial interference with editorial decisions; and

  • cooperate with editors, authors, institutions, and relevant authorities when addressing credible allegations of publication misconduct.

Publication fees or other financial arrangements shall never guarantee manuscript acceptance or influence editorial decisions.

27. Ethical Investigations and Editorial Actions

When credible concerns about research or publication integrity arise, the journal may initiate an investigation.

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the journal may:

  1. request clarification from the authors, reviewers, or editors concerned;

  2. request original data, documentation, ethics approvals, or other evidence;

  3. temporarily suspend manuscript processing;

  4. reject the manuscript;

  5. replace or remove a reviewer;

  6. assign an independent editor;

  7. contact the authors' institution or research integrity office;

  8. contact an ethics committee, funding agency, publisher, or other journal;

  9. publish a correction;

  10. publish an Expression of Concern;

  11. retract an article; or

  12. take other appropriate measures necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

Individuals against whom allegations are made should normally be given an opportunity to respond to the concerns unless doing so would interfere with an independent investigation or be prohibited by law or institutional requirements.

28. Commitment to Research Integrity

EDUCATIONE: Journal of Education Research and Review is committed to protecting the integrity, transparency, reliability, and credibility of the scholarly record.

The journal will take reasonable steps to identify and address suspected misconduct before and after publication and will not knowingly allow serious ethical concerns to remain unaddressed.

All authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and other parties involved in the publication process are expected to comply with these principles and to cooperate in resolving legitimate concerns concerning research and publication integrity.