Responsibilities of Authors

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable, whether it involves copying someone else’s work or self-plagiarism (reusing substantial parts of the author’s own published work without appropriate citation). Submissions must not contain fabricated or falsified data. All sources, data, and ideas of others must be appropriately cited or quoted. The journal utilizes plagiarism detection tools and follows COPE guidelines to evaluate suspected cases of plagiarism.

Multiple Submissions

Manuscripts submitted to iSET Journal must not be under consideration or published in any other journal or conference. Authors should not submit the same work (in whole or in part) to multiple outlets simultaneously. Similarly, authors should avoid fragmenting one study into multiple manuscripts (“salami slicing”). Redundant publications or submitting a manuscript that has been previously rejected by another journal without significant revision is discouraged; any related work (published or under review elsewhere) must be disclosed at submission.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work. Only those who have made significant scholarly contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study should be listed as authors. All co-authors should have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed co-authors meet these criteria and that no legitimate contributor is omitted (and, conversely, that no guest or honorary authors are included). Minor contributors (who do not meet authorship criteria) should be acknowledged in a dedicated Acknowledgments section with their consent. Any changes to the author list after submission (addition, removal, order change) must be approved by all co-authors and justified to the Editor.

Data Integrity and Reproducibilit

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others is required. Authors must cite all publications that have influenced their work. Any content (text, figures, data) reproduced from other sources must be clearly identified and credited with permission where required. Direct quotations should be marked as such and accompanied by a citation. Authors must also acknowledge any funding sources and declare any other assistance (technical, writing, etc.) in the manuscript’s Acknowledgments section.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must present their results truthfully and accurately. Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data is a serious ethical violation. Sufficient detail and references should be provided to permit others to replicate the work. If the research involves data, authors should retain the raw data and make it available for editorial review upon request, in line with applicable data sharing policies. Where relevant, authors should also comply with field-specific standards for data availability and reproducibility (e.g., depositing datasets in appropriate repositories).

Ethical Research Compliance

If the work involves human subjects, animals, or sensitive data, authors must ensure compliance with all relevant ethical standards and obtain necessary institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee approvals. Such approvals and consent must be stated in the manuscript. Authors should follow international and national guidelines to ensure ethical oversight (e.g., informed consent, confidentiality of subject data).

Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or personal relationships that could be viewed as potential conflicts of interest (competing interests) concerning the work. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. If uncertain about what might constitute a conflict, authors should err on the side of transparency. Declaring conflicts of interest does not disqualify a manuscript, but it is essential for maintaining trust and transparency.

Errors and Corrections

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted manuscript or published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s Editor-in-Chief. In coordination with the journal, authors should cooperate to retract or correct the paper as necessary (through an erratum or corrigendum). This obligation applies to both published and under-review papers.

Copyright and Permissions

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that the work does not infringe on any existing copyright or intellectual property rights. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to reproduce any copyrighted material (such as lengthy text extracts, figures, or tables) from other sources and for covering any associated fees. Upon acceptance and publication, authors will be asked to agree to the journal’s copyright or licensing terms (which will be clearly outlined by the publisher). iSET Journal holds the copyright for all published articles (unless otherwise specified by an open-access license), and authors or third parties must seek permission from the journal for any substantial reuse of the published content. Authors must not include defamatory or libelous statements in their work.

Declaration of Generative AI use

Authors must declare the use of generative AI in the manuscript preparation process upon submission of the paper.

Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat the manuscripts they receive as confidential documents. No information contained in a manuscript under review may be shared with anyone outside the peer review process, nor used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not attempt to identify or contact the authors; iSET Journal employs a double-blind review policy (author and reviewer identities are concealed) to ensure impartiality. If a reviewer inadvertently discovers the identity of an author or has prior knowledge of the work, they should recuse themselves and inform the editor.

Objectivity and Impartiality

Reviews should be conducted objectively and constructively. Reviewers are expected to provide clear, reasoned, and courteous feedback that will help the authors improve their work. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript’s scientific merit, originality, methodology, interpretation of results, and compliance with the journal’s scope and standards, without bias. They must judge work on its own merits, regardless of the nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or other personal characteristics of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

If a reviewer recognizes a potential conflict of interest with a manuscript (whether personal, financial, intellectual, or professional—e.g., competitive or collaborative relationships with the authors or institutions involved), they must decline to review and notify the editor immediately. Examples of conflicts include: working at the same institution as one of the authors, recent collaboration or co-authorship with the authors (typically within the last 2–3 years), or any circumstance that might compromise the reviewer’s objectivity. Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have a stake in the outcome.

Expertise and Competence

Invitations to review are extended based on expertise. Reviewers should accept assignments only if they have appropriate knowledge in the subject area and can provide a high-quality assessment. If a reviewer feels unqualified to assess certain aspects of the manuscript, or cannot complete the review in a timely manner, they should promptly decline and/or inform the editor so that alternative reviewers can be arranged. Reviewers are encouraged to decline reviewing if they feel unable to provide a fair, unbiased review.

Timeliness

Reviewers should adhere to the agreed timeframe for completing reviews. If circumstances prevent a reviewer from meeting the deadline, they should contact the editorial office as soon as possible to request an extension or to withdraw from the review process. iSET Journal strives to make publication decisions in a timely manner, and prompt reviewer feedback is crucial to that process.

Review Quality and Feedback

Reviewers should write their evaluations clearly and provide substantiated arguments for their recommendations (whether to accept, revise, or reject). Criticisms, suggestions for improvement, and questions should be specific and supported by evidence or reasoning, with references to published literature if applicable. The goal is to assist the editors in decision-making and help authors enhance their work. Reviewers should flag any ethical concerns they detect in the manuscript (e.g., possible plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, unethical procedures) to the editors confidentially.

Responsibilities of Editors and the Editorial Board

Editorial Independence and Fair Play

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board members are responsible for deciding which submissions to iSET Journal are published, based on the paper’s significance, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Editorial decisions are made without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The editorial team exercises its decisions independently, free from undue influence from the publisher, owners, or external agencies. iSET Journal adheres to the principle of fair play, ensuring that each manuscript is evaluated purely on its academic merit and alignment with the journal’s focus. The Editor-in-Chief holds ultimate authority for acceptance or rejection of manuscripts, often in consultation with the editorial board and based on peer reviewers’ reports.

Confidentiality

The editorial staff (Editor-in-Chief, associate editors, editorial board members, and editorial office personnel) must maintain confidentiality of all submissions. They will not disclose information about a manuscript (including its receipt, content, status in the review process, reviewer identities, or outcome) to anyone except those directly involved in the processing and review (authors, designated reviewers, and editorial advisers as appropriate). The journal maintains a double-blind peer review; editors and staff must guard the anonymity of reviewers and authors. Identities of reviewers will not be revealed to authors or other reviewers; identities of authors are not revealed to reviewers until (if) a manuscript is accepted and published. Confidential information or ideas obtained through the peer review process must not be used by editors or board members for personal advantage or shared with third parties.

Conflict of Interest and Recusal

Editors and editorial board members must avoid situations of real or perceived conflicts of interest. If an editor or board member is authoring or co-authoring a submission, or has a close personal or financial relationship or rivalry with the author(s) of a manuscript under consideration, they will not be involved in the editorial decisions for that manuscript. Editorial board members shall recuse themselves from deliberations and decisions where conflicts exist. The journal has policies to handle submissions by editors or board members: e.g., such papers are typically handled by a guest editor or another board member to ensure impartial review. Any potential editorial conflict (such as handling manuscripts from one’s own institution or colleagues) should be disclosed and resolved in a way that maintains the integrity of the review.

Quality of the Peer Review Process

The editorial team is responsible for establishing and upholding high standards of peer review. Editors select qualified, independent reviewers (typically at least two per manuscript) with appropriate expertise. They should monitor the quality and timeliness of reviews, provide guidance to reviewers as needed, and ensure that the review feedback is constructive and civil. The Editor-in-Chief will evaluate reviewers’ performance over time and may remove from the reviewer pool those who consistently produce unhelpful or biased reviews. Editors should also take reasonable steps to verify the originality of submissions (e.g., using plagiarism detection software) and ensure the scientific quality of published papers through rigorous peer review and editorial oversight.

Transparency and Editorial Accountability

ditors must ensure that authors are informed of the editorial decision on their manuscript along with constructive reviewer comments. Decisions (acceptance, revision, or rejection) should be clearly communicated to authors in a timely manner. If a paper is rejected without external review (e.g., because it is out of scope or below the journal’s standards), the editors should do so fairly and objectively. The editorial board should meet or confer regularly to discuss the journal’s direction, editorial policies, and quality control. At least one member of the editorial board should represent international expertise, and at least one member should be from the academic research community (to provide diverse perspectives), reflecting the journal’s commitment to international standards and academic rigor.

Editorial and Publishing Ethics Compliance

The editorial board is responsible for enforcing this Code of Ethics and handling any ethical violations. Editors should be vigilant for signs of misconduct (plagiarism, data issues, etc.) in submitted manuscripts, and they should follow established procedures (in line with COPE guidelines) when concerns arise. The editorial team will cooperate with authors’ institutions or other authorities if an ethical investigation is necessary. Editors will issue corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern when needed, according to the journal’s policies (see Section 4 below). The editorial board, in collaboration with the publisher, ensures that ethical standards are understood and met, and will provide education or guidance to authors and reviewers if needed. Moreover, editors must not use unpublished information from submissions for their own research without explicit written consent from the authors.

Publication Ethics and Handling of Misconduct

Alignment with COPE and International Standards

iSET Journal is dedicated to maintaining the integrity of the academic record. We adhere to the COPE Core Practices and other internationally recognized publication ethics guidelines. All stakeholders (authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher) are expected to familiarize themselves with these standards to ensure ethical compliance in every aspect of the publishing process.

Procedures for Misconduct

Any suspicion of ethical misconduct (such as plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication or falsification, unethical research behavior, citation manipulation, etc.) will be taken seriously. When potential misconduct is identified:

• Investigation: The Editor-in-Chief and editorial board will initiate a confidential investigation. This may involve requesting explanations from the authors, examining the available evidence (e.g., plagiarism reports, data checks), and consulting with external experts or the authors’ institutions.
• Outcome: If misconduct is confirmed (or the explanation is unsatisfactory), the journal will take appropriate action. This may include rejection of the manuscript (if under review), or in the case of a published article, publication of a retraction, correction, or editorial expression of concern as warranted by the situation. Minor issues (e.g., minor plagiarism due to oversight) may be addressed with a required correction; serious breaches (e.g., fraudulent data, major plagiarism) will result in retraction and notification of relevant parties (such as the authors’ institution and possibly funding agencies). All determinations will be made following COPE flowcharts and guidelines to ensure fairness and consistency.
• Right of Appeal: Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions or findings of misconduct by contacting the Editor-in-Chief with a detailed explanation. Appeals will be considered by editors not involved in the initial decision or by the full editorial board. The journal will respond to appeals in a neutral and timely manner, possibly seeking independent opinions. The decision on an appeal is final.

Originality Check

iSET Journal employs plagiarism detection software on all submissions to screen for unoriginal material. Manuscripts that are found to contain plagiarized or excessively overlapping material will be scrutinized and authors may be asked for clarification, or the manuscript may be rejected outright, depending on severity.

Data Integrity and Reproducibility Policy

The journal encourages authors to provide access to underlying data where practical and to describe their methods transparently. Significant datasets or code should be made available in trusted repositories or as supplementary material (when not restricted by proprietary or confidentiality issues) to enable reproducibility. If questions about data accuracy or validity arise during or after peer review, authors may be asked to provide raw data or additional documentation for verification.

Confidentiality and Privacy

Beyond the peer review confidentiality (Section 2), the journal also respects personal privacy and data protection. Any personal data (e.g., individual details in case studies) included in a manuscript should be accompanied by a statement of informed consent or have identifying details anonymized, in accordance with privacy laws and ethical standards. The editorial office will support anonymization of content when necessary and will reject papers where privacy or confidentiality has been inappropriately compromised.

Editorial Corrections and Retractions

iSET Journal has a duty to correct the scholarly record as needed. If an error or misconduct is identified post-publication, the journal will publish a Correction (Erratum or Corrigendum) to rectify minor issues (e.g., author name spelling, minor factual errors), or a Retraction in cases of major flaws or unethical content (with a retraction notice explaining the reason). In cases where an article’s findings are still valid but the author violated ethical standards (e.g., undisclosed conflict of interest), an Expression of Concern or editorial note may be published to alert readers. All such notices will be clearly linked to the original article and indexed accordingly.

Copyright and Access Policy

The journal’s copyright and license terms are communicated to authors upon acceptance. In general, iSET Journal requires a transfer of copyright (or an exclusive publishing license) to the publisher for each article, while respecting authors’ moral rights. This allows the publisher and journal to protect the work against unauthorized use and to manage permissions. Authors may use their published work in certain permitted ways (e.g., in teaching, or in a thesis) as outlined in the author agreement. The journal/publisher grants permission for reasonable reuse of content for scholarly purposes, provided proper credit is given. For any use not covered by fair use or the author agreement, interested parties must seek permission from iSET Journal or its publisher. The journal may offer open-access options in line with funder mandates and will abide by the associated ethical and licensing requirements (e.g., Creative Commons licenses, if applicable).