Interiority journal adapts the standards of publication ethics as stated in the Core Practices of the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE). These include the policies regarding authorship and contributorship, the procedure for handling allegations of misconduct, handling of complaints and appeals, handling of conflicts of interests/competing interests, policies on data and reproducibility, ethical oversight, intellectual property, journal management, peer-review process, and post-publication discussions and corrections.
Authorship and Contributorship
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 is responsible to ensure that all appropriate co-authors have been included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to the submission of the paper for publication.
The journal only accepts manuscripts that have not been previously published nor being considered for publication elsewhere. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to similarity check procedure to identify any indication of plagiarism. The editorial board is responsible to follow up any indication of plagiarism conducted by the author(s).
The journal implements the peer review policy as a means to ensure the quality of the publication in the journal. The peer-review process consists of initial review, double-blind review, and the decision by the editor.
Initial Review: The editor evaluates the submitted manuscript to determine if the content is suitable for the journal. Manuscripts with contents that are not suitable for the journal will be returned immediately to the author(s).
Peer Review: Submitted manuscripts that have passed the initial review are subjected to double-blind review, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous during the review process. Minimum of two reviewers are assigned to evaluate and provide the recommendation for a manuscript. In assigning the reviewers, the editor is responsible to avoid the conflict of interest during the review process.
Decision: The editor makes the final decision on the acceptability of a manuscript based on the comments and recommendation of the reviewers.
Duties of Editors, Reviewers and Authors
The following statements describe the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal: the editor, the reviewer, and the author.
Duties of Editors
Decision on the publication of articles: The Editors are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The Editors are guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and subjected to such legal requirements regarding copyright and plagiarism. The Editors may confer with editorial board members or reviewers in making this final decision.
Fair play; Manuscripts shall be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, or citizenship.
Confidentiality; The Editor, the Editorial Board Members, and any editorial staffs 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.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in his or her own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to editorial decision: Peer review assists the editors and the editorial board in making editorial decisions while editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality: 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. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that had been previously reported elsewhere should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editors/editorial board member'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 conflicts of interest: Reviewers should not review 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.
Duties of Authors
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. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple and concurrent publications: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
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.
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.
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.