Publication Ethics, Publication Malpractice Statements, and Ethical Guidelines
The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business (JAFEB) is keen to ensure best practices in manuscript management, the review process, editorial selection, publication preparation, publication storage and distribution, and continuous improvement in our publication business operations. It directly reflects the authors' work quality and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles help and embody the scientific method. It is, therefore, essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals. The JAFEB takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
The journals of JAFEB strongly encourage all editors, publishers, researchers, and peer reviewers to carefully review and follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines.
1. Duties of Authors
1.1. Reporting Standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be identified as such.
1.2. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
1.3. Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and the work and/or words of others must be cited or quoted according to the publication guidelines. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
1.4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
An author should not generally publish manuscripts describing the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently constitutes unacceptable publishing behavior. Generally, an author should not present a previously published paper for consideration in another journal.
1.5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained during confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the author's explicit written permission for the work involved in these services.
1.6. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
1.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancy, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication Decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
2.2. Fair Play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the author's written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other members of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. Other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the leading journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely based on academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer-reviewed sections of their journal should be identified.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communications with the author, may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is essential to formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. The JAFEB shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications should do a fair share of reviewing.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
3.4. Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the author's express written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts with conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Plagiarism Detection
CrossCheck powered by iThenticate is a multi-publisher initiative to screen published and submitted content for originality. The JAFEB randomly uses the iThenticate software to detect instances of overlapping and similar text in submitted manuscripts.