PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

The Editorial Board, Staff, and Authors of the International Journal of Research on Multidisciplinary Studies (IJROMS) are committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical conduct in scholarly publishing. IJROMS adheres to internationally recognized principles of research integrity and publication ethics, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability throughout the editorial and peer-review process.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Authorship should accurately reflect individuals who have made a significant intellectual or practical contribution to the research. Academic rank or administrative position does not confer automatic authorship. In collaborative research involving students, the student should normally be listed as the primary author for work derived primarily from their thesis or dissertation. Authorship agreements should be established early in the research process.

• The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed, approved, and consented to the final manuscript. Any changes to the author list must be confirmed in writing.

• Authors must submit only original work and avoid duplicate or redundant publication. Previously published data, images, or content must not be submitted as new research. Manuscripts will be screened using plagiarism detection tools.

• Self-citation should be relevant and not excessive. Authors should appropriately reference their prior work when it directly contributes to the current study.

• Authors should make underlying data available to qualified researchers for verification, provided confidentiality and legal requirements are maintained. Data should only be used for the stated research purpose.

• Research findings must be presented honestly and objectively. Data should be accurately reported, and conclusions should be supported by evidence. Misrepresentation or fabrication of results is strictly prohibited.

• All sources and ideas taken from other works must be properly cited or quoted. A similarity index of 20% or lower is expected using standard plagiarism detection software.

• Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest, including financial, professional, or personal relationships that may influence the study or interpretation of results. Funding sources should be clearly acknowledged.

• Authors are required to report any errors or inconsistencies discovered after publication promptly, allowing the Editorial Board to correct or retract the work as necessary.

Responsibilities of the Editors

• Editors are responsible for deciding which manuscripts are published, based solely on academic merit, originality, and relevance, without influence from personal, commercial, or political considerations.

• Manuscripts are evaluated impartially and confidentially. Editors must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted work and use unpublished information only with the author’s consent.

• Editors must handle conflicts of interest by assigning alternative editors or reviewers. Decisions should not be influenced by financial gain, personal relationships, or institutional affiliations.

• Editors ensure that ethical concerns, including suspected plagiarism, data manipulation, or other misconduct, are addressed in accordance with the journal’s policies and international guidelines (e.g., COPE).

• Corrections, retractions, clarifications, and expressions of concern must be issued when necessary to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Reviewers assist editors in evaluating manuscripts fairly, objectively, and confidentially.

• They should accept review assignments only if qualified and able to complete them in a timely manner.

• Manuscripts must not be shared or discussed with others without explicit permission.

• Reviews should be constructive, objective, and free from personal bias. Reviewers should identify any relevant works not cited by the authors and disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

• Privileged knowledge gained through peer review must not be used for personal advantage or research before publication.

Peer Review & Publication Process

The International Journal of Research on Multidisciplinary Studies (IJROMS) employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process designed to ensure impartial evaluation, uphold academic integrity, and maintain high scholarly standards.

Each stage of the workflow is clearly assigned to a designated editorial role to guarantee accountability, transparency, and efficiency. Our editorial practices align with internationally recognized publishing standards and ethical frameworks, including the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and global best practices in scholarly publishing.

Estimated Review Duration: Approximately 6–12 weeks
(May vary depending on reviewer availability, complexity of the manuscript, and timeliness of author revisions.)

Stage 1: Initial Screening

Duration: 2–5 days
Responsible: Managing Editor / Editorial Staff

Purpose:
To verify compliance with submission and ethical standards prior to full editorial evaluation.

Key Actions:

• Confirm completeness (abstract, keywords, references, figures, tables, author details)

• Ensure adherence to journal formatting and submission guidelines

• Conduct preliminary plagiarism screening and ethical compliance checks

• Return non-compliant manuscripts with administrative feedback

Outcome: Manuscript proceeds to Editorial Desk Review or is returned for correction.

Stage 2: Editorial Desk Review

Duration: 1–2 weeks
Responsible: Editor-in-Chief

Purpose:
To evaluate scope, relevance, originality, and overall suitability for peer review.

Key Actions:

• Assess alignment with IJROMS’ aims and scope

• Evaluate novelty and scholarly contribution

• Identify potential conflicts of interest

• Determine whether the manuscript advances to peer review or is desk rejected

Outcome: Decision to proceed to peer review or desk rejection with constructive feedback.

Stage 3: Peer Review

Duration: 2–4 weeks
Responsible: Executive Editor / Associate Editors

Purpose:
To conduct a thorough double-blind evaluation by independent subject experts.

Key Actions:

• Assign at least two qualified reviewers

• Ensure assessment of:

  • Originality and novelty

  • Methodological rigor and data integrity

  • Clarity, structure, and academic writing quality

  • Ethical compliance and citation accuracy

  • Contribution to theory, practice, or policy

• Collect detailed reviewer reports and recommendations:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revision

  • Major Revision

  • Reject

• Maintain confidentiality and impartiality

Outcome: Consolidated reviewer reports submitted to the Associate Editor.

Stage 4: Associate Editor Evaluation

Duration: 1 week
Responsible: Associate Subject Editor

Purpose:
To synthesize reviewer feedback and prepare a structured editorial recommendation.

Key Actions:

• Evaluate consistency and fairness of reviewer comments

• Ensure feedback is constructive and actionable

• Submit formal recommendation to Editor-in-Chief

Outcome: Recommendation report and consolidated feedback to authors.

Stage 5: Author Revision & Response

Duration: 2–4 weeks (depending on revision type)
Responsible: Authors (Monitored by Associate Editor)

Purpose:
To allow comprehensive revision and scholarly improvement.

Key Actions:

• Revise manuscript according to reviewer feedback

• Prepare a detailed point-by-point response document

• Submit revised version for editorial assessment

• For major revisions, additional reviewer consultation may occur

Outcome: Revised manuscript submitted for final evaluation.

Stage 6: Final Decision

Duration: 3–7 days
Responsible: Editor-in-Chief

Purpose:
To issue a definitive editorial decision.

Possible Decisions:

• Accept

• Minor Revision

• Major Revision

• Reject

Outcome: Formal decision letter issued with clear justification and next steps.

Stage 7: Production & Publication

Responsible: Managing Editor / Editorial Staff

Purpose:
To prepare manuscripts for professional publication and global dissemination.

Key Actions:

• Copyediting, formatting, proofreading, and quality assurance

• DOI assignment and metadata preparation

• Author proof approval

• Online publication with open access availability

Outcome: Final published manuscript in IJROMS.

Confidentiality

All information about authors, reviewers, and submitted manuscripts is strictly confidential and shared only with relevant editorial staff and reviewers.

Dealing with Misconduct

Any suspected ethical or research misconduct is treated seriously and handled according to COPE guidelines. Misconduct may include plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or breaches of ethical standards.

Plagiarism and Data Accuracy

All manuscripts are screened for plagiarism using reliable detection software. Data and references are manually verified to ensure accuracy. Manuscripts failing these checks will not proceed to publication.

Copyright and Open Access

Upon acceptance, authors sign a copyright transfer agreement. IJROMS is an open-access journal, and all published articles are freely available for reading and download, supporting global knowledge dissemination and accessibility.