Journal Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of Exclusion Studies is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and preventing any form of malpractice in the scholarly publishing process. One of the priorities of the editorial team is to publish quality papers. The journal adheres to the guidelines and principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and is dedicated to promoting integrity, transparency, and accountability in all aspects of its operations. For this purpose, those who are involved in the journal from authors, peer reviewers and members of editorial board are expected to fully adhere to our policy regarding publication ethics and malpractice. Anyone who believes that research published in the Journal of Exclusion Studies is not in line with these principles should raise their concerns with the Chief Editor.

Duties of Editors

Editor must ensure a fair peer review of the submitted articles for publication. They will strive to prevent any potential conflict of interests between the author and editorial and review personnel. Editors will also ensure that all the information related to submitted typescripts is kept confidential before publishing. Editor-in-Chief will coordinate the work of the editors.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers evaluate typescripts based on content without regard to the caste, creed, gender, region, religion or political philosophy of the authors. They must evaluate the submitted works objectively as well as present clearly their opinions on the works in a clear way in the review format of the JES.

Duties/Responsibilities of the Authors

Authors submitting their work to IJE must ensure that their manuscripts represent original research, free from any form of plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification. Proper acknowledgment of the contributions of others must be provided, and all sources used in the research should be appropriately cited. Concurrent submissions to other journals or redundant publications of the same work are considered unethical and are not acceptable. Authors who submit papers to our Journals attest that their work is original and unpublished and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Authorship Order: The order of authors should reflect their relative contributions to the research and manuscript preparation. The first author usually made the most significant contributions, followed by subsequent authors in decreasing order of contribution.

Corresponding Author: One author or more should be designated as the corresponding author, responsible for communication with the journal and readers. This author’s contact details are often provided for inquiries and correspondence. The corresponding author is directed to ensure that all co-authors are included in the paper, and that the co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Transparency: Authors should provide a clear description of each author’s contributions to the research and manuscript. Authors are required to provide detailed contributions based on roles listed.

Conflict of Interest: Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their research or its interpretation. This could include financial, personal, or professional relationships that might be seen as influencing the work.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and properly cited. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and redundant publication (submitting the same work to multiple journals) are unethical practices and should be avoided.

Data Integrity: Authors should provide accurate and transparent reporting of data, methods, and results. Fabrication (is making up data or results and recording or reporting them), falsification (is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record), and selective reporting of data are considered serious ethical breaches.

Freedom of Expression, Libel and Disclaimer: Editorial Board upholds our authors’ right to freedom of expression; however, we do not support false statements against individuals or organizations. Legal opinion will be sought in case of allegations of libel, and will proceed accordingly.

Duties of the Publisher

In cases of proven scientific misconduct, plagiarism, or fraudulent publication, the publisher, in collaboration with the editors will take appropriate action to clarify the situation, publish an erratum, or retract the work in question.

Peer Review Policy Statement

The manuscripts published in the journal are subjected to peer-review through obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers/experts in the relevant field/area of study. As stated under Duties/Responsibilities of Reviewers, judgments made are objective, with requirements of reviewers filling up a prescribed manuscript proforma review format; reviewers have no conflict of interest; and it is informed that reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited, and the reviewed manuscripts are to be treated confidentially. All published articles in Journal must subscribe to a rigorous peer review process based on initial editor screening. The objective is to assure research/review quality, sustain the originality and quality of research work and filtration of poor quality and plagiarized articles.

The “peer review process” involves the following – The author/s write/s a research/review manuscript and submits it adhering to/ following the INSTRUCTIONS given to the authors – The Chief Editor does the initial screening and forwards it to the Reviewers after due consultations with the Editorial Advisory Board (EAB)/ Section/ Subject Editors – Reviewers review the manuscript according to the guidelines provided and verify the quality of research/review following a proforma of review format – The article is returned to the Chief Editor along with a recommendation to either reject the article, revise it or accept it. – The article is returned to the Author along with the reviewer’s feedback – The Editor receives the updated article, it is vetted by the EAB/Chief Editor and sent for Publication.

Special Issues / Conference Proceedings will have almost similar peer review procedures with slight modifications. – Chief Editor’s Decision is final in all the above, and reserves the right in all decisions/actions.

Editorial decisions: These decisions are based on peer review. The reviewers are expected to maintain absolute confidentiality with regard to the contents of manuscripts. The reviews are conducted objectively and the referees are expected to express their views clearly with supporting reasons. The reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the authors and the subject matter of the research. The reviewers are required to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation or argument which has been previously reported should also be accompanied along with the relevant citation. Similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published paper of which the reviewer may have personal knowledge, may also be brought to the attention of the members of the EAB. The information or ideas obtained through peer review are of a privileged nature and these are kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers are informed not to consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the manuscript.

Duties/Responsibilities of EAB/Reviewers: The EAB and the Chief Editor follow “Peer Review Policy” of the Journal. This Policy ensures the practice of publishing only good research papers. It is supported by an objective process as carried out by all reputed journals. Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the Journal. All manuscripts are peer reviewed following the “peer review process” given above. It is the responsibility of the Chief Editor to convey the decision of the “peer review” within 4-6 weeks. Peer Review follows the “peer review process” given above employing single blind review, where the reviewer remains anonymous to the authors throughout the process. Reviewers are matched to the manuscript according to their expertise as advised by the Subject Editors. The Chief Editor holds a reviewer database containing reviewer contact details together with their subject areas of interest, and this is constantly being updated.

Publication process: Article submissions must adhere to the INSTRUCTIONS. Authors are required to pursue the publication ethics/essential requirements given under the “Ethics and malpractice statement” of the Journal.