Thursday, November 14
Submit your article Submission Guidelines

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication ethics and publication malpractice statement of Information Research Communications (IRC) is guided by principles and standards set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We are committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in all facets of our publication process. The responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and editors are articulated below:

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS

  1. Originality and Attribution: Authors who submit manuscripts to Information Research Communications (IRC) warrant that their submissions constitute their own original work, have not been previously published, and are not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. Proper attribution through citations and quotes is essential for ideas and content not originating from the authors.

  2. Redundant Publication: Authors should refrain from submitting manuscripts describing essentially the same research to multiple journals or publication outlets. Such redundancy is considered unethical publishing behavior and may lead to the rejection of a manuscript under consideration or the retraction of a published article.

  3. Accuracy and Data Presentation: Authors reporting original research must provide an accurate account of their work, accompanied by an objective discussion of its significance. Data should be accurately presented within the manuscript, with sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Fabrication of results or making fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements is considered unethical and may result in manuscript rejection or article retraction.

  4. Conflict of Interest: When manuscripts report on commercial software, hardware, or other products, authors must declare any potential conflict of interest at the beginning of the manuscript. Authors should either state that no conflict of interest exists or provide a description of the nature of any potential conflicts. Additionally, all sources of financial support for the research should be disclosed in the manuscript.

  5. Copyright and Licensing: Authors submitting manuscripts to IRC agree that if their manuscript is accepted for publication, the published article will be copyrighted under a Creative Commons “Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike” license. This license allows authors to retain copyright while permitting others to freely copy, distribute, and display the work under specific conditions.

  6. Permissions for Third-Party Content: Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles. The copyright holder must be informed that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike” license.

  7. Authorship and Acknowledgments: Authors’ names should be listed on the article based on their contributions, with all authors taking responsibility for their individual contributions. Only those individuals who have made substantive contributions should be listed as authors. Individuals with indirect or marginal contributions should be acknowledged in an “Acknowledgments” section at the end of the article.

  8. Correction of Errors: Authors have an obligation to promptly notify IRC’s editors if they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published articles. Authors should cooperate with the editors to correct or retract the article as appropriate.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

  1. Voluntary Review: Reviewers for Information Research Communications (IRC) serve on a voluntary basis. Reviewers who accept assignments should submit their reviews within a reasonable timeframe, typically within three weeks. They have the right to decline invitations to review manuscripts if their current commitments or qualifications do not permit timely and effective review.

  2. Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should recuse themselves from reviewing a manuscript if they lack the necessary expertise or if a potential conflict of interest exists, such as competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript.

  3. Confidentiality: Reviewers must treat manuscripts received for review as confidential documents. They should not share or discuss the content of the manuscript with unauthorized individuals.

  4. Objective and Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are expected to provide objective, clear, and constructive feedback on the manuscripts they review. Personal criticism of authors should be avoided. Reviewers should justify their recommendations and offer suggestions to help authors improve their work.

  5. Identification of Ethical Issues: Reviewers should identify any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and other published works. Concerns related to the ethical acceptability of the research reported should be reported to the editor.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS

  1. Publication Decisions: The Editor of Information Research Communications (IRC) has the ultimate responsibility for deciding whether a submitted manuscript should be published. Decisions are guided by the journal’s policies and ethical standards.

  2. Confidentiality: Editors should ensure the confidentiality of the peer review process. They should not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone other than the author, reviewers, and appropriate editorial team members.

  3. Objective Evaluation: Editors should evaluate manuscripts based on intellectual content, without consideration of the author’s race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. They should seek to ensure the integrity of the blind review process.

  4. Ethical Review: Editors should consider ethical aspects of published research. They should evaluate whether research has minimized ethical harms and should weigh the benefits against potential harms. If necessary, editors may request clarification and documentation regarding research ethics approval.

  5. Retraction and Corrections: Editors will follow COPE’s guidelines for retracting articles when necessary. They are committed to cooperating with research organizations and institutions in matters related to research integrity.

Information Research Communications (IRC) is dedicated to upholding ethical standards and fostering the responsible conduct of research within the field of Information sciences. We encourage all stakeholders to adhere to these ethical guidelines and contribute to the integrity of the scientific publishing process. For further details, please refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).