A general approach to ethics
Every aspect of the research process, from conception to completion, must be carried out in accordance with the most fundamental ethical principles, including those outlined in the European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights. Among these principles is the requirement that no restrictions be imposed on the conduct of research, the obligation to protect individuals' physical and moral integrity, and the well-being of animals.
Ethics is an integral part of research from start to finish, and ethical compliance is key to research excellence. From the conceptual stage of the publication, a thorough ethical evaluation is needed to respect the legal framework and improve research quality. Ethical research involves applying ethical principles and laws to all scientific research in all possible domains of research.
The journal follows COPE's recommendations and core practises (publicationethics.org/core-practices) regarding ethical policies and misconduct. Falsifying data, plagiarising, and breaching confidentiality is misconduct. The publisher and editors-in-chief will consider each case and contact the author (or reviewer). The publisher may contact the author's or reviewer's institution if severe misconduct is suspected. It should be noted that if misconduct is suspected during the review process, the manuscript will be held until any issues are resolved. The manuscript will be rejected immediately if misconduct is discovered during the review process. As well as, if misconduct is discovered after the article has been published, it will be retracted.
Publication Ethics Statement
Journal of Intercultural Communication (JICC) publishes high-quality work by enforcing a rigorous peer-review process and ensuring that high-quality scientific works are added to the field of scholarly publication. In cases of plagiarism, data falsification, and incorrect authorship credit, JICC takes these ethical publication issues very seriously and follows a zero-tolerance policy. JICC uses TURNITIN for all submissions to ensure the originality of the content. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Responsibilities of Editors, Authors, Reviewers
It strives to address a wide range of social sciences, management, education, and current perspectives. The manuscripts submitted for publication in the JICC journal must be written in English. We believe that consistent guidelines for editors, reviewers, and authors will increase the quality of published articles while ensuring that the entire process, from review to publishing, is fair and accurate.
So, it is necessary to comply with the following responsibilities:
-Editors ensure that submitted articles are given fair review, considering each on its academic merits regardless of the author's race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional connection.
-Editors enable contact with all parties involved in the publishing process and ensure that manuscripts are handled and processed promptly and efficiently.
-Editors are solely responsible for a manuscript's approval or rejection. While an editor may seek advice from an initial review, if a manuscript is deemed improper for publication, it may be rejected without review.
-Editors establish clear guidelines and criteria throughout the double-blind peer-review procedure.
-All published research publications are subjected to a double-blind peer-review procedure by expert reviewers.
-Editors must guarantee that the external double-blind peer review process is kept secret at all times and that reviewers and writers remain anonymous at all times. In addition, the authors and reviewers disclosed a conflict of interest.
-Editors look into and document any complaints that may arise throughout the publishing process, and they offer all parties involved a chance to defend their perspectives.
-Editors encourage the release of revisions in the event of errors and, if required, the retraction of articles. But in such cases, if the paper contains a libel, corrections or retractions may be required if published wrong author's information like correct in the name. Affiliation, and email address, If the main substance of a published article is wrong and the article contains information that has not been properly recognized or cited.
Authors must follow the journal's guidelines for authors.
-The authors submit a manuscript containing accurate and original data and an objective appraisal of its importance.
-Authors must follow the journal's Plagiarism policy. Because Plagiarism is not tolerated for submitted content if found. Plagiarism is a major violation of the fundamental principles and foundations of research that must not be accepted.
-To allow their peers to replicate the work, authors include full references to all sources of information.
-Other scholarly work is considered fairly and objectively by the authors, with no personal criticism expressed or implied.
-Authors avoid using fictitious data and offer a declaration stating that all data utilized in the study is real and legitimate.
-At each stage of the research and publication process, authors disclose any conflicts of interest that can jeopardize their academic credibility. If applicable, writers list the sources of funding for their research.
-The authors confirm that the paper has not been submitted and accepted for publication elsewhere. Authors cite those sources which are already published.
-Authors are required to have their submissions peer-reviewed and to work closely with the editors.
-Authors indicate co-authors who contributed significantly to the submitted work and who share responsibility and liability for the outcomes.
-If substantial errors in their work and/or sources are discovered before or after publication, authors must immediately notify the editorial board and assure full cooperation with the editorial board in order to remedy such errors, publish an update, or withdraw the manuscript as needed.
-Reviewers have to follow the journal's review guidelines to ensure a fair review process and maintain the quality of content.
-Reviewers help editors improve the quality of research articles by assessing manuscripts with objectivity and efficiency.
-The reviewers explain why they gave the manuscripts such a high rating. Any declaration of a previously published observation, derivation, or argument must be accompanied by the appropriate citation.
-Reviewers will point it out if relevant public or unpublished work is used but not cited in a manuscript.
-While a manuscript review may justify the criticism, reviewers avoid making personal or spiteful remarks about the author.
-All reviewed articles are kept confidential by reviewers, who do not copy or share them in any way.
-Reviewers confirm that they have no conflicts of interest concerning the study topic, the authors, and or other parties involved. And they have to declare any such conflicts of interest in advance and immediately resign from the assignment.
-The publisher ensures that all actors engaged in the publication process follow the journal's publishing ethics principles and deal with unethical activity if found.
-The publisher is responsible for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of the academic record.
-All levels of the publication process are promoted by the publisher, and it ensures that intellectual standards are not compromised by financial considerations and interests.
-In close collaboration with the editorial board, reviewers, and authors, the publisher is continually working to improve models of good practice.
Dealing with Unethical Behavior
To safeguard the integrity of the academic record of the JICC and its contributors, any violation of these guidelines shall be dealt with in the manner described below:
-Identification of the problem and communication to the editorial board as soon as possible (including information on where and how the code of ethical behaviour has been violated).
-Evidence collecting and thorough evaluation are carried out under the supervision of the editorial board (full documentation of evidence must be provided and investigated for its credibility).
-The party accused of wrongdoing is given a fair chance to react to the allegations and fix the wrongdoing, along with a warning to follow ethical norms in the future.
Human Subjects Protection Statement
This statement's purpose is to explain the survey methods and the human participant protection review process. This protects survey participants while also preserving the research's integrity. This information helps researchers understand how these processes are used in survey research. It covers survey participation, risk, anonymity and confidentiality, survey benefits, and informed consent. This statement assists authors in determining whether human research participants have been adequately protected when a survey interview or questionnaire study is proposed. It covers a variety of scenarios. The key points are listed below.
Because of their participation in surveys, respondents are rarely exposed to any greater dangers than those inherent in everyday life. The majority of surveys advance knowledge and, more broadly, society. The survey is the only method that can provide generalizable information on various aspects of the human condition. Collecting survey data is critical for improving our understanding of social, psychological, and political processes and evaluating and improving public policy. Documenting the participant's consent in a survey is typically impossible and can have a negative impact on the number of people who respond to the survey. However, the most important aspects of consent can be conveyed to respondents in a condensed form at the very beginning of every survey in all survey-based studies. This can be done in a telephone interview's brief introductory statements, a cover letter for a self-administered survey, or the introductory screen in a web survey. This is due to the fact that each of these types of surveys presents the key elements of consent in a unique format. This is true regardless of risk level and is consistent with the modern view of consent as a continuous process rather than a document.
JICC does not reveal reviewers' identities to authors or other reviewers unless requested. We prefer that reviewers remain anonymous during and after the review process. Before revealing their identities, reviewers should consider being asked to comment on other reviewers' criticisms and further manuscript revisions. Identified reviewers may have trouble being objective.
Reviewers are not permitted to reveal their identities to authors unless the editor gives them express permission. They should go through the editor if they want to reveal their identities while the manuscript is still being considered because it is their responsibility. If this is not possible, authors should inform the editor as soon as the reviewer reveals their identity to them.
We oppose authors confronting or identifying reviewers. We don't confirm or deny rumours about reviewers' identities and encourage reviewers to do the same.
The Editors in Chief/editors 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.
The journal cooperates with Publons (product of Web of Science), which allows verifying provided reviews by reviewers https://publons.com/wos-op/journal/37082/journal-of-intercultural-communication/
To ensure the quality of service and long-time relationships with their stakeholders, JICC has a complaint policy in an accountable way. The aim of this policy is to ensure that JICC treats complaints with an immediate response in a polite and confidential manner. JICC learns from the complaints and uses them to improve our service. For any complaint, please email firstname.lastname@example.org.