Publication Ethics

DUTIES OF EDITOR

Publication Decisions

The editors of GEMOVE: Journal of Gender, Movement, and Empowerment guarantees that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-assessment by at least two qualified reviewers from its field. The Head of Editor is accountable for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be posted, based on the validation of the work in question, its beneficial for researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal necessities as are currently in effect regarding libel, copyright violation and plagiarism. The Editor may negotiate with other editors or reviewers to make this decision final.  

Fair Play

Editors appraise submitted manuscripts completely on the basis of their academic advantage, namely: importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity; and its relevance to the journal’s scope, while not relevance to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Head of Editor is in charge over the complete editorial content of the journal and the  temporal arrangement of publication of that content.

Confidentiality

The Editors and any editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of any information about a submitted manuscript only to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The Editors are not allowed to use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted article for their own research goals without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas gained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept secret and not used for their private benefit. Editors will not handle any considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, another member of the editorial board will be asked to handle the manuscript. 

Management of unethical behaviors

The editors, alongside with the publisher(s), should take rationally responsive measures once ethical complaints are bestowed concerning a submitted manuscript or published article. Each reportable act of unethical publishing behavior is going to be looked into, even though it is discovered years after publication. For this reason, GEMOVE: Journal of Gender, Movement, and Empowerment has legal specialist within the field of Intellectual Property Rights as the Ethics Advisory Board.

DUTIES OF AUTHOR

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should show an accurate account of the work performed and therefore the results, followed by an objective discussion of the importance of the work. The manuscript should contain adequate details and references to allow others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, whereas editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly acknowledged as such. Deceitful or knowingly inaccurate statements represent unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors are asked to supply the raw data in reference with a paper for editorial review, and should be ready to provide public access, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should make sure that they have written completely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism may take many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, 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 represents unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. We will check every manuscript using a plagiarism checker (Turnitin) to confirm the originality of the article. Furthermore, each submitted article should be sent along with a letter of statement from the author(s) stating that the article is free from plagiarism.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

Papers describing essentially the same research must not be issued in more than one journal or primary publication. Thus, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been circulated in another journal. Submission of a manuscript synchronally to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of sources

Authors should confirm that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been significant in determining the nature of the reported work. Information acquired in private (from the conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be included or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information gained in the course of providing secret services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work concerned in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be restricted to those who have created a major contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All parties who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Whilst there are others who have participated in certain considerable area of the research project, they should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author should confirm that all co-authors have seen and approved the ultimate version of the paper and have approved to its submission for publication.

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 inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher acknowledges from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the responsibility of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Declaration of competing interests

All authors should reveal in their manuscript any financial support and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work. All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be unveiled, as should the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in any part of data processing; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such association then this should be stated in the paper. The author must announce any competing interests in the manuscript/paper template.

Image integrity

It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a particular feature within an image. Changes of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Manipulating pictures for improved clarity is acceptable, however manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be restrained accordingly. Authors should accommodate with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g. providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or depositing these in a designated repository.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in creating editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may additionally assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels under qualification to review the research reported in a manuscript or is aware that its prompt review will be impossible should inform the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality        

Any manuscripts acquired for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or mentioned with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be run objectively. Ad hominem of the author is inappropriate. Referees should articulate their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should mention 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 proper citation. A reviewer should notify editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper present.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas gained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit. Reviewers should not accept 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 regarding to the papers.