Publication Ethics and Misconduct

Publication Ethics and Misconduct

Alleged Research Infringement Research

The error means falsification, falsification, manipulation of citations, or plagiarism in producing, conducting, or reviewing research and writing articles by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to be involved in research violations or other serious irregularities involving articles that have already been published in a scientific journal, the Editor has a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected violations, the Editors and the Editorial Board will use COPE best practices to help them resolve complaints and deal fairly with violations. This will include an investigation into the allegations by the Editor. Submissions found to contain these errors will be rejected. In cases where the published paper is found to contain such errors, a retraction may be issued and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and assessing whether the allegations are consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individual committing the offense has a relevant conflict of interest.

If a scientific error or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the appropriate authors, who, on behalf of all co-authors, are asked to provide detailed responses. Once responses are received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) can be obtained. For cases where infringement is unlikely, clarification, additional analysis, or both, published as a letter to the editor, and often including notification of corrections and corrections to the published article is sufficient.

Publication Decisions

Editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published.

Editors may be guided by the discretion of the journal's editorial board and limited by legal requirements such as those that would apply regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

post-publication

discussion permits the publication of debate posts either on its website, by letter to the editor, or on a moderated external site.

Fair play

An editor evaluates manuscripts at all times for their intellectual content regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

Editors and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, other editorial advisors, and publishers, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts may not be used in the editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribute to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviews assist editors in making editorial decisions and editorial communication with authors can also assist authors in improving papers.

Appropriateness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that immediate review is not possible, must notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

Review Standards Objectivity reviews

must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information or privileged ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship or connection with the author, company, or any institution with which the paper is related.

Author's Duties

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be represented accurately on paper. A paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Deceptive or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behavior.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written an entirely original work, and if the author has used the work and/or words of others, then this has been properly cited or cited.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

An author may not, in general, publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or major publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship

should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported study. All persons who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they must be recognized or listed as contributors.

Correspondence authors must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have approved its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published work

When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal or publisher's editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Ethical Oversight

If research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript to comply with the ethical conduct of research using both animal and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal and ethical permission from legal associations or organizations.

If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, the author must clearly justify whether the data or information will be securely hidden or not.

Peer Review Process

Peer-Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to Globsports Journal undergo a double-blind peer-review process.

Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent experts in the relevant field.
Reviewers are unaware of the authors’ identities, and vice versa.
The initial editorial screening takes approximately 5–7 days.
The full review process is usually completed within 3–6 weeks.
The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on the reviewers’ reports.

This rigorous process ensures the academic integrity, scientific merit, and ethical standards of the journal.

International Journal of Sports Technology and Science (IJSTS) uses a double-blind system for peer-review, with appropriate reviewers selected from an extensive panel of scholars. Both reviewers and authors’ identities remain anonymous. Each manuscript submitted to IJSTS will be peer-reviewed by at least two experts. Manuscripts are initially assessed by the Editors to ensure readiness for review. If deemed appropriate, manuscripts are then sent out for review, after which one of the following recommendations may be made: accepted for publication, accepted subject to minor revisions, invited to resubmit following substantial revisions, submit elsewhere or declined.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal International Journal of Sports Technology and Scienceis a reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing, including the authors, the peer-reviewers, the journal editors and the publisher. This publication ethics and malpractice statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

For the experimental studies which require ethical board approval, conducted on animals or people in all the disciplines (including social science), the ethical board approval must be obtained and presented in the study with the related information.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution 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 there are others who 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.

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper, without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. 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 clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and, if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Data, text, figures or ideas originated by other researchers should be properly acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Plagiarism Screening Policy

Manuscripts accepted for publication are subjected to plagiarism check through iThenticate plagiarism check software. The authors are expected to conform to the originality expectations of the journal. Once an act of over similarity/plagiarism is detected, authors are informed about the incident and their manuscript is rejected. Authors may be allowed to improve their manuscripts within acceptable limits of similarity.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
The authors must guarantee: (1) that the article has not been published elsewhere; (2) it is not being considered for publication elsewhere; and (3) that it has been submitted with the full knowledge and approval of the institution or organization given as the affiliation of the authors. The submission of multi-authored manuscripts implies the consent of each of the authors.
If data from the article is used, partially or entirely, in other research articles, or the data and results represent only part of a bigger research project described in multiple publications, these must be clearly presented to the editor.

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 that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, 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.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly.

DUTIES OF EDITOR

Publication decisions
An editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Editors should recuse themselves (should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member 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 institutions connected to the papers.

Response to ethical issues
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

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. Any selected expert who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
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.

Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest
Reviewers and editors are required to declare any and all potential conflicts of interest. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.