Jurnal Ilmiah Perikanan dan Kelautan (JIPK; English: Scientific Journal of Fisheries and Marine) will be guided by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and Best Practice Guidelines, However, JIPK will ensure its decisions remain autonomous, grounded in its longstanding policies and principles. JIPK is committed to fostering the advancement and practical application, of consistent ethical standards throughout the scholarly publishing community and to advancing discovery by publishing robust and insightful research, supporting the development of new areas of knowledge in fisheries and marine, and making ideas and knowledge accessible around the world. In taking responsibility for accepting and publishing an author’s research, and our primary duty is to make it as widely discoverable, accessible, understandable, usable, reusable and shareable as possible.
All manuscripts submitted must align with the policies specified by JIPK. In all instances, JIPK rigorously adheres to the publication ethics principles as set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its foundational practices documents. All submitted manuscripts must conform to JIPK’s policies as described. Their advice includes support on handling issues such as: conflicts of interest, authorship and contributorship issues and disputes, misconduct allegations and data issues, overlap and plagiarism, and peer review integrity.
Ethical standards for publication exist to ensure high-quality scientific publications, public trust in scientific findings, and that people receive credit for their work and ideas. However, The JIPK Editorial Boards operate autonomously, with no interference from the publisher in editorial decisions. However, if ethical or legal concerns arise, manuscript acceptance can be revoked. Any manuscript not adhering to JIPK's ethical standards may be retracted by the publisher. JIPK ensures that every manuscript aligns with the Publication Ethics Guidelines, utilizing automated systems like Turnitin and manual checks by the Journal Editorial Office teams. When discrepancies are noted, they are verified by human intervention, and often, an Academic Editor is consulted for further guidance.
JIPK uphold a rigorous peer-review process together with clear ethical policies and standards to support the addition of high-quality scientific studies to the field of scholarly publication. Where we become aware of ethical issues, we are committed to investigating and taking necessary action to maintain the integrity of the literature and ensure the safety of research participants.
Submitted manuscripts should conform with JIPK editorial policies and ethical policies as outlined on this webpage and JIPK Instructions for Authors. In addition, submissions should adhere to individual journal guidelines.
- Prevention—early detection and flagging of potential ethics issues via automated and manual checks of peer review and manuscript.
- Neutrality—to be fair and objective, making assessments to correct the literature where necessary.
- Transparency—keeping all parties informed when possible and appropriate, and providing the time for them to respond.
- Consistency—ensuring standard processes are followed for the investigation of issues and applicability of policies, and principles and flowcharts of COPE are upheld.
Finally, Authors, editors, and reviewers are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practice in publication ethics.
- Authors are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practice in publication ethics including but not limited to those pertaining to authorship (for example avoidance of ghost or guest authorship), dual submission, attribution, plagiarism, image integrity and figure preparation, and competing interests. Authors must also comply with JIPK policies on research ethics (subjects research of related human, animal research: fisheries and marine, global research based on our scope). Details are provided below or in linked documents.
- Reviewers and editors are required to treat manuscripts fairly and in confidence, and to declare any competing interests. Editors should also abide by the code of conduct for editorial board members.
Authors submitting to JIPK must ensure that their manuscripts are ethically sound and meet industry-recognized standards that are reflected in JIPK policies.
Authors should refrain from misrepresenting research results which could damage the trust in the journal, the professionalism of scientific authorship, and ultimately the entire scientific endeavour. Authors who submit their manuscripts to JIPK must:
- Accurately present their research findings and include an objective discussion of the significance of their findings.
- Uphold accurate authorship, by including all and only those who qualify for authorship and clearly stating their contribution.
- Authors should be familiar with and adhere to best practices in publication ethics, especially concerning authorship such as avoidance of ghost or guest authorship, dual submission, attribution, plagiarism, image integrity and figure preparation, and competing interests.
- Authors must also comply with JIPK policies on research ethics (Fish subjects research, animal research, global research).
- Disclose any facts that might be perceived as a possible conflict of interest at submission.
- Present their data and methods with attention to detail. Data and methods used in the research need to be presented in sufficient detail in the manuscript so that other researchers can replicate their work. Raw data must be made publicly available unless there is a compelling reason otherwise (e.g., project confidentiality).
- A single study should not be split up into several parts to increase the quantity of submissions and submitted to various publications or to one publication over time (i.e. ‘salami-slicing/publishing’).
- The manuscript should not be submitted to more than one publication for simultaneous consideration. The submitted work should be original and should not have been published elsewhere in any form or language (partially or in full), unless the new work concerns an expansion of previous work. (Please provide transparency on the re-use of material to avoid the concerns about text-recycling (‘self-plagiarism’).
- Concurrent or secondary publication is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. Examples include: translations or a manuscript that is intended for a different group of readers.
- Results should be presented clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation (including image based manipulation).
- Authors should adhere to discipline-specific rules for acquiring, selecting and processing data. No data, text, or theories by others are presented as if they were the author’s own (‘plagiarism’).
- Proper acknowledgements to other works must be given (this includes material that is closely copied (near verbatim), summarized and/or paraphrased), quotation marks (to indicate words taken from another source) are used for verbatim copying of material, and permissions secured for material that is copyrighted.
- Original research results must be novel and not previously published, and any translations must abide by our policy on translations.
- Obtain permission to publish from the copyright holder for any previously published content (including quotations, figures or tables).
- Communicate errors and inaccuracies found after publication promptly.
- Authors should make sure they have permissions for the use of software, questionnaires/(web) surveys and scales in their studies (if appropriate).
- Research articles and non-research articles (e.g. Review articles) must cite appropriate and relevant literature in support of the claims made.
- Excessive and inappropriate self-citation or coordinated efforts among several authors to collectively self-cite is strongly discouraged.
- Authors should avoid untrue statements about an entity (who can be an individual person or a company) or descriptions of their behaviour or actions that could potentially be seen as personal attacks or allegations about that person.
- Research that may be misapplied to pose a threat to public health or national security should be clearly identified in the manuscript (e.g. dual use of research). Examples include creation of harmful consequences of biological agents or toxins, disruption of immunity of vaccines, unusual hazards in the use of chemicals, weaponization of research/technology (amongst others).
- Authors are strongly advised to ensure the author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors are all correct at submission. Adding and/or deleting authors during the revision stages is generally not permitted, but in some cases may be warranted. Reasons for changes in authorship should be explained in detail. Please note that changes to authorship cannot be made after acceptance of a manuscript. [See also Authorship principles]
If there is suspicion of misbehaviour or alleged fraud the Journal and/or Publisher will carry out an investigation following COPE guidelines. If, after investigation, there are valid concerns, the author(s) concerned will be contacted under their given e-mail address and given an opportunity to address the issue. Depending on the situation, this may result in the Journal’s and/or Publisher’s implementation of the following measures, including, but not limited to:
If the manuscript is still under consideration, it may be rejected and returned to the author. If the article has already been published online, depending on the JIPK and severity of the infraction: an erratum/correction may be placed with the article an editorial expression of concern may be placed with the article or in severe cases retraction of the article may occur
The reason will be given in the published erratum/correction, editorial expression of concern or retraction note. Please note that retraction means that the article is maintained on the platform, watermarked “retracted” and the explanation for the retraction is provided in a note linked to the watermarked article.
The author’s institution may be informed. A notice of suspected transgression of ethical standards in the peer review system may be included as part of the author’s and article’s bibliographic record.
Authors have an obligation to correct mistakes once they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published article. The author(s) is/are requested to contact the journal and explain in what sense the error is impacting the article. A decision on how to correct the literature will depend on the JIPK of the error. This may be a correction or retraction. The retraction note should provide transparency which parts of the article are impacted by the error.
Suggesting / excluding reviewers
Authors are welcome to suggest suitable reviewers and/or request the exclusion of certain individuals when they submit their manuscripts. When suggesting reviewers, authors should make sure they are totally independent and not connected to the work in any way. It is strongly recommended to suggest a mix of reviewers from different countries and different institutions. When suggesting reviewers, the Corresponding Author must provide an institutional email address for each suggested reviewer, or, if this is not possible to include other means of verifying the identity such as a link to a personal homepage, a link to the publication record or a researcher or author ID in the submission letter. Please note that the Journal may not use the suggestions, but suggestions are appreciated and may help facilitate the peer review process.
This list is not exhaustive, and authors should be aware of local regulations and accepted norms within academic publishing.
We acknowledge that different disciplines and publication formats have different norms for who is listed as an author. We expect all authors on any content submitted to JIPK to be in agreement that the authors listed would all be considered authors according to disciplinary norms, and that no authors who would reasonably be considered an author have been excluded. We also expect all listed authors to take responsibility for the integrity of the work. In the event of a dispute or change request (including author order or designation) at any stage of the publishing process, we will be guided by the relevant COPE flowchart, guidance, or case precedents in deciding the appropriate action(s). If these changes raise concerns about the broader integrity of the work further investigation may follow.
All authors will be contacted by email to ensure that they are aware of and approve the submission of the manuscript, its content, and its authorship. JIPK requires that all co-authors confirm their assent to publication by email. Please contact the journal office (firstname.lastname@example.org) or the JIPK Publication Ethics team (email@example.com) if you have concerns about a submission’s authorship.
Authorship issues identified after publication may result in a correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction.
Those who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments. More detailed guidance on authorship is given by ICMJE.
- Authorship definition
- Disclosures and declarations
- Data transparency
- Role of the Corresponding Author
- Author contributions
- Changes to authorship
- Author name change
- Author identification
- Deceased or incapacitated authors
- Authorship issues or disputes
- Consortium/Group Authorship
- Authorship and the Use of AI, Image, or AI-Assisted Technologies
Authorship is a way of making explicit both credit and responsibility for the contents of published articles. Credit and responsibility are inseparable. The guiding principle for authorship decisions is to present an honest account of what took place. Criteria for authorship apply to all intellectual products, including print and electronic publications of words, data, and images. Journal should make their policies on authorship transparent and accessible (https://wame.org/authorship).
JIPK also follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines which state that in order to qualify for authorship of a manuscript, authors must meet all four criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
These guidelines describe authorship principles and good authorship practices to which prospective authors should adhere. JIPK assumes that all authors agreed with the content and that all gave explicit consent to submit and that they obtained consent from the responsible authorities at the institute/organization where the work has been carried out, before the work is submitted. JIPK does not prescribe the kinds of contributions that warrant authorship. It is recommended that authors adhere to the guidelines for authorship that are applicable in their specific research field. In absence of specific guidelines, it is recommended to adhere to the following guidelines based on/adapted from:
1. ICMJE, Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors, http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
2. Transparency in authors' contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication, McNutt et al, PNAS February 27, 2018 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715374115
JIPK encourages collaboration with colleagues in the locations where the research is conducted, and expect their inclusion as co-authors when they fulfill all authorship criteria described above. Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgements section.
Recognizing that ICMJE criteria were developed within the Fisheries and Marine field and that other research communities may have different authorship standards, JIPK transitioned in May 2023 to follow the authorship guidance discussed in McNutt et al. (2018). For JIPK, authors must satisfy all of the following requirements (as per the 2018 article’s recommendations):
- Substantial contributions to one or more of the following: conception or design of the work; acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; creation of new software used in the work; drafting or substantially revising the article and
- Approved the submitted version (and any substantially modified version that involves the author’s contribution to the study) and
- Agrees to be personally accountable for the author’s own contributions AND to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature
APC funding alone does not suffice to meet the authorship criteria.
JIPK does not allow artificial intelligence (AI) tools and technologies to be listed as authors. If AI tools were used in conducting the study or preparing the manuscript, their usage must be disclosed transparently in the Methods section (or the Acknowledgements for article types lacking a Methods section) and the article must clearly report which content was affected. See our Artificial Intelligence Tools and Technologies policy for more information about our requirements.
All authors are requested to include information regarding sources of funding, financial or non-financial interests, study-specific approval by the appropriate ethics committee for research involving humans and/or animals, informed consent if the research involved human participants, and a statement on welfare of animals if the research involved animals (as appropriate).
The decision whether such information should be included is not only dependent on the scope of the journal, but also the scope of the article. Work submitted for publication may have implications for public health or general welfare and in those cases it is the responsibility of all authors to include the appropriate disclosures and declarations.
All authors are requested to make sure that all data and materials as well as software application or custom code support their published claims and comply with field standards. Please note that JIPK may have individual policies on (sharing) research data in concordance with disciplinary norms and expectations. Please check the Instructions for Authors of the Journal that you are submitting to for specific instructions.
One author is assigned as Corresponding Author and acts on behalf of all co-authors and ensures that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately addressed
The Corresponding Author is responsible for the following requirements:
- ensuring that all listed authors have approved the manuscript before submission, including the names and order of authors;
- managing all communication between the Journal and all co-authors, before and after publication*;
- providing transparency on re-use of material and mention any unpublished material (for example manuscripts in press) included in the manuscript in a cover letter to the Editor;
- making sure disclosures, declarations and transparency on data statements from all authors are included in the manuscript as appropriate (see above).
*The requirement of managing all communication between the journal and all co-authors during submission and proofing may be delegated to a Contact or Submitting Author. In this case please make sure the Corresponding Author is clearly indicated in the manuscript.
Please check the Instructions for Authors of the Journal that you are submitting to for specific instructions regarding contribution statements.
JIPK encourage transparency by publishing author contribution statements. Authors are required to include a statement of responsibility in the manuscript, including review-type articles, that specifies the contribution of every author. The level of detail varies; some disciplines produce manuscripts that comprise discrete efforts readily articulated in detail, whereas other fields operate as group efforts at all stages. Author contribution statements are included in the published paper. This Editorial describes the policy in more detail.
JIPK also allow one set of co-authors to be specified as having contributed equally to the work and one set of co-authors to be specified as having jointly supervised the work. Other equal contributions are best described in author contribution statements.
JIPK mandates a clear description of each author's specific contributions using the CRediT Taxonomy . The author submitting the manuscript must delineate the roles and responsibilities of every contributing author at the time of submission. Prior to this, it's anticipated that all authors will have assessed, consulted on, and reached a consensus regarding their respective roles in the study. Contributions will be published with the final article, and they should accurately reflect contributions to the work.
Ideas; formulation or evolution of overarching research goals and aims.
Management activities to annotate (produce metadata), scrub data and maintain research data (including software code, where it is necessary for interpreting the data itself) for initial use and later reuse.
Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data.
Acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication.
Conducting a research and investigation process, specifically performing the experiments, or data/evidence collection.
Development or design of methodology; creation of models
Management and coordination responsibility for the research activity planning and execution.
Provision of study materials, reagents, materials, patients, laboratory samples, animals, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools.
Programming, software development; designing computer programs; implementation of the computer code and supporting algorithms; testing of existing code components.
Oversight and leadership responsibility for the research activity planning and execution, including mentorship external to the core team.
Verification, whether as a part of the activity or separate, of the overall replication/reproducibility of results/experiments and other research outputs.
Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically visualization/data presentation.
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
Creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation).
Writing – Review & Editing
Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work by those from the original research group, specifically critical review, commentary or revision – including pre- or post-publication stages.
For complete transparency, all submitted manuscripts should include an author contributorship statement that specifies the work of each author. For research articles with several authors, a short paragraph specifying their individual contributions must be provided in paper before references following statements template.
The following statements should be used: Conceptualization, X.X. and Y.Y.; methodology, X.X.; software, X.X.; validation, X.X., Y.Y. and Z.Z.; formal analysis, X.X.; investigation, X.X.; resources, X.X.; data curation, X.X.; writing—original draft preparation, X.X.; writing—review and editing, X.X.; visualization, X.X.; supervision, X.X.; project administration, X.X.; funding acquisition, Y.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
For review articles, where individual statements are less applicable, a statement should be included that clarifies who was responsible for the ideation, who performed the literature search and/or data analysis, and who drafted and revised the work.
For articles that are principally based a student’s dissertation or thesis, JIPK recommends that the student is listed as principal author.
In academic publishing, the affiliation of an author is the place (institution) at which the author conducted the research that they have reported / written about. However, given the frequent mobility of academics, that place may not necessarily be the place the author happens to be based at the time of submitting the paper. The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. Indicate all affiliations with a lower-case superscript letter immediately after the author's name and in front of the appropriate address. Provide the full postal address of each affiliation, including group/school/department, faculty, institution, (including postal or zip code), country name, and, if available, the e-mail address of each author. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may additionally be stated. Addresses will not be updated or changed after publication of the article.
JIPK follow the COPE guidelines for changes in authorship.
Authors are strongly advised to ensure the correct author group, the Corresponding Author, and the order of authors at submission. Any changes to the author list after submission, such as a change in the order of the authors or the deletion or addition of authors, must be approved by every author. Changes of authorship by adding or deleting authors, and/or changes in Corresponding Author, and/or changes in the sequence of authors are not permitted after acceptance of a manuscript.
Please note that author names will be published exactly as they appear on the accepted submission.
Please make sure that the names of all authors are present and correctly spelled, and that addresses and affiliations are current.
Adding and/or deleting authors at revision stage are generally not permitted, but in some cases it may be warranted. Reasons for these changes in authorship should be explained. Approval of the change during revision is at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. To request any change in authorship, the journal must receive a completed authorship change form JIPK that includes the signatures of all authors, and provides a reason for the change. Any changes to authorship requested after manuscript acceptance will result in a delay in publication. If the manuscript has already been published, requests for a change in authorship will be evaluated and require the publication of a Correction. We reserve the right to request evidence of authorship, and changes to authorship after acceptance will be made at the discretion of JIPK. This will be reviewed by the Editor (and in some instances, the publisher). Please note that JIPK may have individual policies on adding and/or deleting authors during revision stage.
In the case of an authorship dispute, the journal will not arbitrate. If the authors are unable to resolve the dispute themselves, we will defer the issue to the authors’ institution(s) in accordance with COPE guidelines. The journal will abide by institutional recommendations following authorship investigations, with rare exception.
If we encounter delays resolving pre-publication authorship issues - e.g., if pre-publication authorship disputes are not resolved in a timely fashion, or if we require but have difficulty obtaining an institution’s input - JIPK may withdraw or reject the submission. It is the authors’ responsibility in such cases to follow-up with one another or with the relevant institutional official(s) in order to resolve any pending issues. JIPK may consider a resubmission if/when the issue is resolved.
Authorship changes after publication are addressed via Corrections, except in rare circumstances.
We will update author bylines via silent republication (i.e., without an accompanying Correction notice) to reflect name changes of transgender or non-binary authors. Other name change requests may be granted at the journal’s discretion.
Some authors might wish to change their name following publication. In such cases, JIPK will update and republish the article and re-deliver the updated metadata to the appropriate indexing databases (please note that all updates are dependent upon the policies of the databases). Our teams are aware that name changes can be sensitive and/or private in JIPK, for a variety of reasons that may include alignment with gender identity, marriage, divorce, or religious conversion. The author can choose for this correction to happen silently, in which case there will be no note flagging the change on either the pdf or the html of the paper, or alternatively they may do so by a formal public Author Correction. Authors should contact the journal’s Editorial Office with their name change request.
The submission system will prompt authors to use an ORCID iD (a unique author identifier) when submitting an article for consideration or acquire an ORCID ID via the submission process to help distinguish their work from that of other researchers. We publish the corresponding author's ORCID iD as well as any ORCIDs provided by co-authors if the manuscript is accepted. We encourage co-authors to register and use their ORCID as well. To access your ORCID record, please visit the ORCID Registry at https://orcid.org/signin or https://orcid.org/register
For cases in which a co-author dies or is incapacitated during the writing, submission, or peer-review process, and the co-authors feel it is appropriate to include the author, co-authors should obtain approval from a (legal) representative which could be a direct relative.
After that, the corresponding author, or co-authors, should inform the editorial office. If the deceased author was a corresponding author, the authorship group should nominate a co-author for this role. The corresponding author should confirm the contribution of the deceased author and any potential conflicts of interest. Upon publication, a note will be added under the author list.
Authors should treat all communication with the Journal as confidential which includes correspondence with direct representatives from the Journal such as Editors-in-Chief and/or Handling Editors and reviewers’ reports unless explicit consent has been received to share information.
JIPK follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines when it comes to resolving authorship disputes that may occur either during processing or post-publication. Here, COPE guidelines clearly state that Journals are not in a position to adjudicate on appropriate authorship contributions (https:/publicationethics.org/resources/discussion-documents/authorship) and that disputed authorship is not usually grounds for retraction when “there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings” (https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelines).
In situations where disputes cannot be settled by the effected parties, Journals will reach out to an appropriate Institution or Governing Body for final adjudication. JIPK reserves the right to amend authorship lists in line with Institution or Governing Body recommendations.
If authorship is retained by the consortium or group, the consortium or group should be listed as an author. Individual consortium/group author members listed in the author byline must qualify for authorship according to ICMJE guidelines.
Where work is presented by the author(s) on behalf of a consortium or group, this should be clarified in the author list, for example “Author A on behalf of XXX Consortium/Group”. The consortium/group will not retain authorship and will only appear in the author list.
If provided, the consortium/group members will be listed in a separate section at the end of the article in Acknowledgments, Appendix or Supplementary Materials.
AI or AI-Assisted Technologies
JIPK follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) position statement when it comes to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technology in manuscript preparation. Tools such as ChatGPT and other large language models (LLMs) do not meet authorship criteria and thus cannot be listed as authors on manuscripts.
In situations where AI or AI-assisted tools have been used in the preparation of a manuscript, this must be appropriately declared with sufficient details at submission via the cover letter. Furthermore, authors are required to be transparent about the use of these tools and disclose details of how the AI tool was used within the “Materials and Methods” section, in addition to providing the AI tool’s product details within the “Acknowledgments” section.
Authors are fully responsible for the originality, validity, and integrity of the content of their manuscript and must ensure that this content complies with all of JIPK’s publication ethics policies. JIPK reserves the right to request further information, and editorial decisions will be made in line with JIPK’s Editorial Process.
Generative AI Images
The fast moving area of generative AI image creation has resulted in novel legal copyright and research integrity issues. As publishers, we strictly follow existing copyright law and best practices regarding publication ethics. While legal issues relating to AI-generated images and videos remain broadly unresolved, JIPK is unable to permit its use for publication.
Exceptions are images/art obtained from agencies that we have contractual relationships with that have created images in a legally acceptable manner. Other exceptions to this policy include images and video that are directly referenced in a piece that is specifically about AI and will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
As we expect things to develop rapidly in this field in the near future, we will review this policy regularly and adapt it if necessary.
Please note: Not all AI tools are generative. The use of non-generative machine learning tools to manipulate, combine or enhance existing images or figures should be disclosed in the relevant caption upon submission to allow a case-by-case review.
Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be mentioned in the Acknowledgments. It is expected that those being acknowledged have given their permission to be named.
The Committee on Publication Ethics has defined them as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. Known as the three “cardinal sins” of research conduct, falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism (FFP) are the primary concerns in avoiding research misconduct. Any divergence from these norms undermines the integrity of research for that individual, lab, university/corporation, and the field as a whole.
Falsification is manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g. micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. The changing or omission of research results (data) to support claims, hypotheses, other data, etc. Falsification can include the manipulation of research instrumentation, materials, or processes. Manipulation of images or representations in a manner that distorts the data or “reads too much between the lines” can also be considered falsification.
Fabrication is concerns the making up of research findings. The construction and/or addition of data, observations, or characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or running of experiments. Fabrication can occur when “filling out” the rest of experiment runs, for example. Claims about results need to be made on complete data sets (as is normally assumed), where claims made based on incomplete or assumed results is a form of fabrication.
Recommended action by COPE for Journal Editors:
- Suspected fabricated data in a submitted manuscript
- Suspected fabricated data in a published article
Plagiarism is, perhaps, the most common form of research misconduct. Researchers must be aware to cite all sources and take careful notes. Using or representing the work of others as your own work constitutes plagiarism, even if committed unintentionally. When reviewing privileged information, such as when reviewing grants or journal article manuscripts for peer review, researchers must recognize that what they are reading (Read more).
Plagiarism is not acceptable in JIPK submissions. Plagiarized content will not be considered for publication. If plagiarism is identified, we will follow COPE guidelines.
Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:
- Directly copying text from other sources without attribution
- Copying ideas, images, or data from other sources without attribution
- Reusing text from your own previous publications without attribution or agreement of the editor (see the COPE guidelines on text recycling and the text recycling guidance released by the Text Recycling Research Project)
- Exception: Reusing text from the Methods section in the author’s previous publications, with attribution to the source, is acceptable
- Using an idea from another source with slightly modified language without attribution
Plagiarism is not acceptable in JIPK. Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images, or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving credit to the original source.
Reuse of text that is copied from another source must be between quotation marks and the original source must be cited. If a study's design or the manuscript's structure or language has been inspired by previous studies, these studies must be explicitly cited.
All JIPK submissions are checked for plagiarism using the industry standard software iThenticate. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, an investigation will take place and action taken in accordance with our policies.
Image files must not be manipulated or adjusted in any way that could lead to misinterpretation of the information provided by the original image. Irregular manipulation includes 1) introduction, enhancement, moving, or removing features from the original image, 2) grouping of images that should obviously be presented separately (e.g., from different parts of the same gel, or from different gels), or 3) modifying the contrast, brightness or color balance to obscure, eliminate or enhance some information.
If irregular image manipulation is identified and confirmed during the peer review process, we may reject the manuscript. If irregular image manipulation is identified and confirmed after publication, we may correct or retract the paper.
Data presented must be original and not inappropriately selected, manipulated, enhanced, or fabricated. This includes 1) exclusion of data points to enhance significance of conclusions, 2) fabrication of data, 3) selection of results that support a particular conclusion at the expense of contradictory data, 4) deliberate selection of analysis tools or methods to support a particular conclusion (including p-hacking). We strongly recommend preregistration of methods and analysis.
When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), revised in 2013. According to point 23 of this declaration, an approval from the local institutional review board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee must be obtained before undertaking the research to confirm the study meets national and international guidelines. As a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ of the article.
Example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."
For non-interventional studies (e.g. surveys, questionnaires, social media research), all participants must be fully informed if the anonymity is assured, why the research is being conducted, how their data will be used and if there are any risks associated. As with all research involving humans, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics committee must be obtained prior to conducting the study. If ethical approval is not required, authors must either provide an exemption from the ethics committee or are encouraged to cite the local or national legislation that indicates ethics approval is not required for this type of study. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee which provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation regarding why ethical approval was not required.
A written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participating patients. Data relating to individual participants must be described in detail, but private information identifying participants need not be included unless the identifiable materials are of relevance to the research (for example, photographs of participants’ faces that show a particular symptom). Patients’ initials or other personal identifiers must not appear in any images. For manuscripts that include any case details, personal information, and/or images of patients, authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication from patients (or their relatives/guardians) before submitting to an JIPK journal. Patient details must be anonymized as far as possible, e.g., do not mention specific age, ethnicity, or occupation where they are not relevant to the conclusions. A blank version of the form used to obtain permission (without the patient names or signature) must be uploaded with your submission. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
You may refer to our sample form and provide an appropriate form after consulting with your affiliated institution. For the purposes of publishing in JIPK, a consent, permission, or release form should include unlimited permission for publication in all formats (including print, electronic, and online), in sublicensed and reprinted versions (including translations and derived works), and in other works and products under open access license. To respect patients’ and any other individual’s privacy, please do not send signed forms. The journal reserves the right to ask authors to provide signed forms if necessary.
If the study reports research involving vulnerable groups, an additional check may be performed. The submitted manuscript will be scrutinized by the editorial office and upon request, documentary evidence (blank consent forms and any related discussion documents from the ethics board) must be supplied. Additionally, when studies describe groups by race, ethnicity, gender, disability, disease, etc., explanation regarding why such categorization was needed must be clearly stated in the article.
The editors will require that the benefits potentially derived from any research causing harm to animals are significant in relation to any cost endured by animals, and that procedures followed are unlikely to cause offense to the majority of readers. Authors should particularly ensure that their research complies with the commonly-accepted '3Rs' :
- Replacement of animals by alternatives wherever possible;
- Reduction in number of animals used; AND
- Refinement of experimental conditions and procedures to minimize the harm to animals.
Authors must include details on housing, husbandry and pain management in their manuscript.
For further guidance authors should refer to the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Used in Scientific Procedures , American Association for Laboratory Animal Science  or European Animal Research Association .
If national legislation requires it, studies involving vertebrates or higher invertebrates must only be carried out after obtaining approval from the appropriate ethics committee. As a minimum, the project identification code, date of approval and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’. Research procedures must be carried out in accordance with national and institutional regulations. Statements on animal welfare should confirm that the study complied with all relevant legislation. Clinical studies involving animals and interventions outside of routine care require ethics committee oversight as per the American Veterinary Medical Association. If the study involved client-owned animals, informed client consent must be obtained and certified in the manuscript report of the research. Owners must be fully informed if there are any risks associated with the procedures and that the research will be published. If available, a high standard of veterinary care must be provided. Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript.
If ethical approval is not required by national laws, authors must provide an exemption from the ethics committee, if one is available. Where a study has been granted exemption, the name of the ethics committee that provided this should be stated in Section ‘Institutional Review Board Statement’ with a full explanation on why the ethical approval was not required.
If no animal ethics committee is available to review applications, authors should be aware that the ethics of their research will be evaluated by reviewers and editors. Authors should provide a statement justifying the work from an ethical perspective, using the same utilitarian framework that is used by ethics committees. Authors may be asked to provide this even if they have received ethical approval.
JIPK endorses the ARRIVE guidelines (arriveguidelines.org/) for reporting experiments using live animals. Authors and reviewers must use the ARRIVE guidelines as a checklist, which can be found at https://arriveguidelines.org/sites/arrive/files/documents/ARRIVE%20Compliance%20Questionnaire.pdf. Editors reserve the right to ask for the checklist and to reject submissions that do not adhere to these guidelines, to reject submissions based on ethical or animal welfare concerns or if the procedure described does not appear to be justified by the value of the work presented.
- NSW Department of Primary Industries and Animal Research Review Panel. Three Rs. Available online: https://www.animalethics.org.au/three-rs
- Home Office. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes. Available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388535/CoPanimalsWeb.pdf
- American Association for Laboratory Animal Science. The Scientific Basis for Regulation of Animal Care and Use. Available online: https://www.aalas.org/about-aalas/position-papers/scientific-basis-for-regulation-of-animal-care-and-use
- European Animal Research Association. EU regulations on animal research. Available online: https://www.eara.eu/animal-research-law
Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines, the provenance should be stated and references must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin. Editors reserve the rights to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
An example of an ethical statement:
The HCT116 cell line was obtained from XXXX. The MLH1+ cell line was provided by XXXXX, Ltd. The DLD-1 cell line was obtained from Dr. XXXX. The DR-GFP and SA-GFP reporter plasmids were obtained from Dr. XXX and the Rad51K133A expression vector was obtained from Dr. XXXX.
Experimental research on plants (either cultivated or wild) including collection of plant material, must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. We recommend that authors comply with the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
For each submitted manuscript supporting genetic information and origin must be provided. For research manuscripts involving rare and non-model plants (other than, e.g., Arabidopsis thaliana, Nicotiana benthamiana, Oriza sativa, or many other typical model plants), voucher specimens must be deposited in an accessible herbarium or museum. Vouchers may be requested for review by future investigators to verify the identity of the material used in the study (especially if taxonomic rearrangements occur in the future). They should include details of the populations sampled on the site of collection (GPS coordinates), date of collection, and document the part(s) used in the study where appropriate. For rare, threatened or endangered species this can be waived but it is necessary for the author to describe this in the cover letter.
Editors reserve the rights to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
An example of Ethical Statements:
Torenia fournieri plants were used in this study. White-flowered Crown White (CrW) and violet-flowered Crown Violet (CrV) cultivars selected from ‘Crown Mix’ (XXX Company, City, Country) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX (XXX Institute, City, Country).
Arabidopis mutant lines (SALKxxxx, SAILxxxx,…) were kindly provided by Dr. XXX , institute, city, country).
Clinical Trials Registration
JIPK follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines which require and recommend registration of clinical trials in a public trials registry at or before the time of first patient enrollment as a condition of consideration for publication.
Purely observational studies do not require registration. A clinical trial not only refers to studies that take place in a hospital or involve pharmaceuticals, but also refer to all studies which involve participant randomization and group classification in the context of the intervention under assessment.
Authors are strongly encouraged to pre-register clinical trials with international clinical trials register and cite a reference to the registration in the Methods section. Suitable databases include clinicaltrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register and those listed by the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.
Approval to conduct a study from an independent local, regional, or national review body is not equivalent to prospective clinical trial registration. JIPK reserves the right to decline any paper without trial registration for further peer-review. However, if the study protocol has been published before the enrolment, the registration can be waived with correct citation of the published protocol.
Ethical considerations for the use of animals
Jurnal Ilmiah Perikanan dan Kelautan (JIPK) takes its responsibility towards animal/fish welfare very seriously, whether it concerns fish collection, predator-prey interactions or invasive surgical procedures. Any research in this Work done on animals/fish (if applicable) adheres to currently applicable and internationally recognized ethical standards, and that recognized ethics committee approval for the research was obtained. At the same time JIPK recognizes that permitting requirements for animal collections and animal welfare have regional differences and therefore may not be exactly the same as those stipulated in Indonesia country, which is the home of JIPK.
Therefore, when a research paper that involves animal experimentation or harm is submitted to JIPK, authors are accepting and acknowledging that appropriate permits for animal collections and animal welfare issues were sought and approved by the local committee(s) responsible for such permits.
Furthermore, as specific evidence of the permitting, a clear statement must be provided in the first paragraph of the Materials and Methods for any submissions to the JIPK. This statement may take a form similar to the following:
 "The care and use of experimental animals complied with [Insert the local or national body] animal welfare laws, guidelines and policies as approved by [Insert the local or national permitting authority and the permit reference number]".
 This experiment was performed on the basis of approval by the laboratory animals use the research ethics committee of faculty of veterinary medicine [2019/23/UA], Airlangga University, Indonesia
 This experiment was performed according to all ethics and animal rights (Desert Research Center). As much as this work had considering all rules and regulations in conformity with the European Union directive for the protection of experimental animals (2010/63/EU).
Independent of any such permits, the JIPK still reserves the right to reject papers on an ethical basis should valid concerns emerge from the contents of the research paper. Indeed, if a submission is received from a country where no such permitting is required, then the decision rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief, who will seek advice from the Editorial Team, referees and other qualified scientists as needed. Therefore, it is essential that authors are clear in their Materials and Methods on questions such as:
- Were fishes collected as part of faunal surveys?
- Were fishes killed during or at the end of your experiment (e.g., for tissue sampling)?
- Were surgical procedures performed?
- Did the experimental conditions severely distress any fishes involved in your experiments?
- Did any procedures (e.g., predation studies, toxicity testing) cause lasting harm to sentient fishes?
- Did any procedure involve sentient, un-anesthetized animals that were subjected to chemical agents that induce neuromuscular blockade, such as muscle relaxants?
Ahead of submission, authors will benefit greatly from reading our Editorials on animal welfare:
- Ethical justification for the use and treatment of fishes in research http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.0022-1112.2006.01035.x/full(2006),
- Ethical justification for the use and treatment of fishes in research: an update: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2010.02900.x/full (2011), and
- All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelinesand should be carried out in accordance with the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 and associated guidelines, EU Directive 2010/63/EU for animal experiments, or the National Research Council's Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and the authors should clearly indicate in the manuscript that such guidelines have been followed. The sex of animals must be indicated, and where appropriate, the influence (or association) of sex on the results of the study: https://www.elsevier.com/journals/fish-and-shellfish-immunology/1050-4648/guide-for-authors#6000
JIPK requires a completed CONSORT 2010 checklist and flow diagramas a condition of submission when reporting the results of a randomized trial. Templates for these can be found here or on the CONSORT website (http://www.consort-statement.org) which also describes several CONSORT checklist extensions for different designs and types of data beyond two group parallel trials. At minimum, your article should report the content addressed by each item of the checklist.
JIPK follows the practical framework defined in Guidance for Editors: Research, Audit and Service Evaluations and introduced by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Research that could pose a significant threat, with broad potential consequences to public health or national security, should be clearly indicated in the manuscript, and potential dual-use research of concern should be explained in the cover letter upon submission. Potential areas of concern include but are not limited to biosecurity, nuclear and chemical threats, and research with a military purpose or application, etc. For these manuscripts to be considered for peer review, the benefits to the general public or public health must outweigh the risks. The authors have a responsibility to comply with relevant national and international laws.
Potential disputes over borders and territories may have particular relevance for authors in describing their research or in an author or editor correspondence address, and should be respected. Content decisions are an editorial matter and where there is a potential or perceived dispute or complaint, the editorial team will attempt to find a resolution that satisfies parties involved.
JIPK stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
According to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, “Authors should avoid entering into agreements with study sponsors, both for-profit and non-profit, that interfere with authors’ access to all of the study’s data or that interfere with their ability to analyze and interpret the data and to prepare and publish manuscripts independently when and where they choose”.
Authors must identify and declare any personal circumstances or interests that may be perceived as inappropriately influencing the representation or interpretation of the reported research results. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include but are not limited to financial interests (such as membership, employment, consultancies, stocks/shares ownership, honoraria, grants or other funding, paid expert testimonies and patent-licensing arrangements) and non-financial interests (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, and personal beliefs).
Any role of the funding sponsors in the design of the study, in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results must be declared in this section. If there is no role, please state, “The funding sponsors had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results”.
The corresponding author must include a summary statement in the manuscript in a separate section “Conflicts of Interest” placed just before the reference list. The statement should reflect all the collected potential conflicts of interest disclosures in the form.
Authors are requested to disclose interests that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. Interests within the last 3 years of beginning the work (conducting the research and preparing the work for submission) should be reported. Interests outside the 3-year time frame must be disclosed if they could reasonably be perceived as influencing the submitted work. Disclosure of interests provides a complete and transparent process and helps readers form their own judgments of potential bias. This is not meant to imply that a financial relationship with an organization that sponsored the research or compensation received for consultancy work is inappropriate.
Interests that should be considered and disclosed include, but are not limited, to the following:
Funding: Research grants from funding agencies (please give the research funder and the grant number) and/or research support (including salaries, equipment, supplies, reimbursement for attending symposia, and other expenses) by organizations that may gain or lose financially through publication of this manuscript.
Employment: Recent (while engaged in the research project), present or anticipated employment by any organization that may gain or lose financially through publication of this manuscript. This includes multiple affiliations (if applicable).
Financial interests: Stocks or shares in companies (including holdings of spouse and/or children) that may gain or lose financially through publication of this manuscript; consultation fees or other forms of remuneration from organizations that may gain or lose financially; patents or patent applications whose value may be affected by publication of this manuscript.
It is difficult to specify a threshold at which a financial interest becomes significant, any such figure is necessarily arbitrary, so one possible practical guideline is the following: "Any undeclared financial interest that could embarrass the author were it to become publicly known after the work was published."
Non-financial interests: In addition, authors are requested to disclose interests that go beyond financial interests that could impart bias on the work submitted for publication such as professional interests, personal relationships or personal beliefs (amongst others). Examples include, but are not limited to: position on editorial board, advisory board or board of directors or other type of management relationships; writing and/or consulting for educational purposes; expert witness; mentoring relations; and so forth.
Primary research articles require a disclosure statement. Review articles present an expert synthesis of evidence and may be treated as an authoritative work on a subject. Review articles therefore require a disclosure statement.Other article types such as editorials, book reviews, comments (amongst others) may, dependent on their content, require a disclosure statement. If you are unclear whether your article type requires a disclosure statement, please contact the Editor-in-Chief.
Please note that, in addition to the above requirements, funding information (given that funding is a potential conflict of interest (as mentioned above)) needs to be disclosed upon submission of the manuscript in the peer review system. This information will automatically be added to the Record of CrossMark, however it is not added to the manuscript itself. Under ‘summary of requirements’ (see below) funding information should be included in the ‘Declarations’ section.
Summary of requirements
The above should be summarized in a statement and included in a section entitled “Declarations” before the reference list. Other declarations include Funding, Conflicts of interest/competing interests, Ethics approval, Consent, Data and/or Code availability and Authors’ contribution statements.
Should the information already be mentioned somewhere else in the manuscript, for example under Methods & Materials, please make sure to repeat that information on this page.
Please see the various examples of wording below and revise/customize the sample statements according to your own needs.
When all authors have the same (or no) conflicts and/or funding, it is sufficient to use one blanket statement.
Provide “Funding” as a heading (see template)
Partial financial support was received from [...]
The research leading to these results received funding from […] under Grant Agreement No[…].
This study was funded by […]
This work was supported by […] (Grant numbers […] and […]
In case of no funding:
The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.
No funding was received for conducting this study.
No funds, grants, or other support was received.
Provide “Conflicts of interest/Competing interests” as a header (see template)
Financial interests: Author A has received research support from Company A. Author B has received a speaker honorarium from Company Wand owns stock in Company X. Author C is consultant to company Y.
Non-financial interests: Author C is an unpaid member of committee Z.
Financial interests: The authors declare they have no financial interests.
Non-financial interests: Author A is on the board of directors of Y and receives no compensation as member of the board of directors.
Financial interests: Author A received a speaking fee from Y for Z. Author B receives a salary from association X. X where s/he is the Executive Director.
Non-financial interests: none.
Financial interests: Author A and B declare they have no financial interests. Author C has received speaker and consultant honoraria from Company M and Company N. Dr. C has received speaker honorarium and research funding from Company M and Company O. Author D has received travel support from Company O.
Non-financial interests: Author D has served on advisory boards for Company M, Company N and Company O.
When authors have nothing to declare the following statement may be used:
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.
The authors have no financial or proprietary interests in any material discussed in this article.
Authors are responsible for correctness of the statements provided in the manuscript. See also Authorship Principles. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject submissions that do not meet the guidelines described in this section.
For all articles published in JIPK, Copyright of the article is transferred to the journal, by the knowledge of the author, whilst the moral right of the publication belongs to the author. The legal formal aspect of journal publication accessibility refers to Creative Commons Atribusi-Non Commercial-Share alike (CC BY-NC-SA), (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/). However, anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work, while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit.
In exceptional circumstances, articles may be licensed differently. If you have specific condition (such as one linked to funding) that does not allow this license, please mention this to the Editorial Office of the journal at submission. Exceptions will be granted at the discretion of the publisher.
For previously published content, it is essential that prior to submission, authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, tables, text, etc.) that does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright.
Permission is required for:
- Your own work published by other publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
- Substantial extracts from the work of anyone's works or a series of work.
- Use of tables, graphs, charts, schemes and artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
- Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for:
- Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please note that in this case, you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
- Very short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
- Graphs, charts, schemes and artwork that is completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission. However, you may need to check the copyright permissions of any underlying data.
Once you have obtained permission, the copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed. Alternatively, we recommend following the style: “Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year]”.
JIPK may consider high-quality content that has been previously published in a different language for publication, provided that the original study is appropriately referenced in the Acknowledgments section.
- Authors should clearly declare that their paper is a translated version in the cover letter at submission;
- All authors from the original publication must appear on the submitted manuscript;
- Appropriate permission must be sought and granted from the publisher, copyright holders, and/or authors of the original article prior to manuscript submission;
- Relevant documentation relating to these permissions must be uploaded in the Supplementary Materials section during submission;
- The journal editor must be informed about the publishing history of the previously published content;
- The original article must be referenced in the Acknowledgments section.
“This is a translation/reprint of (insert title here) originally published in (insert language) by (insert publisher) (insert journal name, year, issue/volume number, page numbers). This translation was prepared by (insert name) with support from (insert name of funding source, if any). Permission was granted by (insert publisher, copyright holder, and/or authors name).”
Any translated articles that do not follow the above guidelines are unacceptable. Those that pass the pre-check will be peer-reviewed in accordance with JIPK’s editorial process.
JIPK provide fast, rigorous peer review and rapid publication following acceptance. Accepted articles are immediately available online, complete with a DOI, and published on an ongoing basis regardless of their issue’s date of release. Publication, peer review and editorial procedures, proofreading and copyediting, and any other processes will not be postponed for pending issues relating to patent applications or intellectual property. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all patent applications and intellectual property issues are resolved prior to publication. Any patent applications or registrations should be declared in accordance with JIPK’s Conflicts of Interest Policy.
Authors should ensure that where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing), the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained.
Authors should not engage in excessive self-citation of their own work.
Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
Authors should not preferentially cite their own or their friends’, peers’, or institution’s publications.
Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.
In accordance with COPE guidelines, we expect that “original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations”. This condition also applies to an author’s own work. COPE have produced a discussion document on citation manipulation with recommendations for best practice.
JIPK is committed to supporting open scientific exchange and enabling our authors to achieve best practices in sharing and archiving research data. We encourage all authors of articles published in JIPK to share their research data. Individual journal guidelines can be found at the journal ‘Instructions for Authors’ page. Data sharing policies concern the minimal dataset that supports the central findings of a published study. Generated data should be publicly available and cited in accordance with journal guidelines.
JIPK data policies are informed by TOP Guidelines.
Where ethical, legal or privacy issues are present, data should not be shared. The authors should make any limitations clear in the Data Availability Statement upon submission. Authors should ensure that data shared are in accordance with consent provided by participants on the use of confidential data.
Data Availability Statements provide details regarding where data supporting reported results can be found, including links to publicly archived datasets analyzed or generated during the study.
Below are suggested Data Availability Statements:
- Data available in a publicly accessible repository
The data presented in this study are openly available in [repository name e.g., FigShare] at [doi], reference number [reference number].
- Data available in a publicly accessible repository that does not issue DOIs
Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: [link/accession number].
- Data available on request due to restrictions eg privacy or ethical
The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to [insert reason here].
- 3rd Party Data
Restrictions apply to the availability of these data. Data was obtained from [third party] and are available [from the authors/at URL] with the permission of [third party].
- Data sharing not applicable
No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
- Data is contained within the article or supplementary material
The data presented in this study are available in [insert article or supplementary material here].
- [dataset] Authors. Year. Dataset title; Data repository or archive; Version (if any); Persistent identifier (e.g., DOI).
Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors
Along with the Editorial Office, all participants in the peer-review process, including Editors-in-Chief, Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors and Reviewers, take responsibility for overseeing the integrity of JIPK’s editorial process.
If a participant in the peer-review process has ethical concerns about a manuscript sent for review or decision, or receives information about a possible ethical issue after publication, they must contact the Editorial Office as soon as possible. The Editorial Office will then conduct an investigation as per the JIPK Comments and Complaints Policy and in accordance with COPE guidelines.
We are committed to ensuring the integrity of the Reviewers' ethical responsibilities and duties, in accordance with COPE guidelines.
- Reviewers should review the peer review responsibilities and duty of the Journal before revealing their reviewer role.
- Reviewers contribute to editorial decisions by validating a newly submitted author’s research to confirm its suitability for publication
- Reviews should be conducted objectively, and and it's inappropriate to personally criticize the author or make slanderous comments.
- Reviewers should generally treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and observe good reviewing etiquette.
- Reviewers should provide comments in time that will help editors to make a decision on whether the submitted manuscript is to be published or not.
- Reviewers comments on each submitted manuscript should be technical, professional, and objective. They should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Reviewers who feel unqualified to review the submitted manuscript or they are unable to a prompt review should notify the editor.
- Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts, which they are invited to review. They must not share the review or any information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.
- If there was a need to discuss with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, the reviewer should first notify the editor in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed or it is allowed.
- Reviewer is not allowed to use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript unless written consent is obtained from the author.
- Reviewer must keep ideas and novel information obtained through peer review confidential and not used for personal advantage.
- Reviewer should notify the editor by the relevant comments, if there were any ethical issues in the paper, including any substantial overlap with other published papers.
- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and references.
- Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts with which they believe they have a competing interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. If they have found conflicts of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions, so reviewers should consult the editor.
- Any suggestion by a reviewer in the manuscript to cite his/her published work is allowed only per genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the reviewer’s citation index.
- Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of material supplied to them and not discuss unpublished manuscripts with colleagues or use the information in their own work.
- Any reviewer who wants to pass a peer review invitation onto a colleague must contact the journal in the first instance.
We are committed to ensuring the integrity of the editors' ethical responsibilities and duties, in accordance with COPE guidelines.
- The Editors of the journal should have the full authority to reject/accept a manuscript.
- The Editors of the journal should maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts under review or until they are published.
- The Editor-in-Chief should make a decision on submitted manuscripts, whether to be published or not with other editors and reviewers
- Editors are expected to obtain a minimum of two peer reviewers for manuscripts reporting primary research or secondary analysis of primary research.
- The Editors of the journal should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
- The Editors of the journal should disclose and try to avoid any conflicts of interest.
- The Editors of the journal should maintain academic integrity and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
- The Editors of the journal should be willing to investigate plagiarism and fraudulent data issues and to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed.
- The Editors of the journal should limit themselves only to the intellectual content.
- The Editors of the journal must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
- Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.
Before and during peer review, the following checks are performed by Managing Editors and Assistant Editors in the Editorial Office. However, concerns from Reviewers and Editors should still be reported to the Editorial Office.
- Ethics approval and permissions for research involving human subjects, animals or cell lines.
- Plagiarism, duplicate publication, and necessary permission from the copyright holder to include already-published figures or images.
- Clinical Trials Registration, and reference to the registration in the Methods Section.
- Other compliance, ethics and research integrity checks in accordance with JIPK policies and guidelines.
When making a recommendation or final acceptance decision on a manuscript, Reviewers and Editors should consider:
- Any facts that might be perceived as a possible conflict of interest must be disclosed, and authors must disclose conflicts of interest relating to their manuscript or study prior to submission.
- Authors must accurately present their research findings and include an objective discussion of the significance of their findings.
- Data and methods used in the research need to be presented in sufficient detail in the paper, so that other researchers can replicate their work.
- Whether or not the submission fits the scope of the journal.
- Reviewers provided sufficient feedback and were suitable to review the submission.
Potential Conflicts of Interests
We support transparency, and all those involved in the peer-review process must carefully consider and declare any conflicts of interest when participating in the review, decision-making process, and publication of an article. All associations that interfere with, or could be potentially perceived as interfering with, the full and objective assessment, peer review and decision-making process must be declared.
Even if a Reviewer or Editor believes that the existence of a conflict of interest, or several conflicts of interest, will not impact the peer review or decision-making process, the Reviewer or Editor should remove themselves from the process to avoid the perception of a conflict of interest and to protect the integrity of the peer-review process.
Types of Conflicts of Interest
Personal or Collaborative
Neither Reviewers nor Editors should take part in the review of manuscripts submitted by authors who are affiliated with their own institution, by authors who are research or project collaborators, or by any authors who are personal friends, family members, or spouses. Reviewers or Editors should not take part in the review or decision-making process of manuscripts submitted by authors who currently represent or have represented a mentor or mentee role or relationship in the past, or those with whom they have collaborated or coauthored in the last 3 years.
Financial or Professional Conflicts
Financial conflicts include any professional or business relationships, financial or commercial interests, or other competing interests that may be viewed as potentially introducing bias into the review process. Neither Reviewers nor Editors should receive professional or personal benefits, salary, board membership, funding or grants from a company or companies with interests in the reported results or other aspects of the manuscript content, honoraria, or hold any other interests in a company whose product is discussed in the article, or intellectual property rights such as patents, royalties, and copyright as a result of their contribution. Reviewer and Editors should not take part in the review or decision-making process of manuscripts where conflicts of interest that may be viewed as potentially introducing bias are present.
Any other conflicts of interest, either real or potentially viewed as influencing the outcome of peer review and the decision-making process, should be declared. Reviewers and Editors should evaluate the manuscript’s merit, originality and appropriateness for the journal in accordance with JIPK editorial guidelines. JIPK aims to build journal that are diverse and inclusive, and discrimination based on race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religion, country of origin, physical ability, or socio-economic status has no place in JIPK. Reviewers and Editors must disclose personal biases that may affect peer review.
In the event of a conflict of interest, alternative Reviewers and/or Editors will be found. If an Editor submits a manuscript to the journal, their submission will be handled by other Editors who do not have a conflict of interest.
Confidentiality and Anonymity
Reviewers and Editors must keep the content of the manuscript, including the abstract, confidential. Reviewers must inform the Editorial Office if they would like a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf.
JIPK perform single- or double-blind peer review. Reviewers should be careful not to reveal their identity to the authors, either in their comments or in metadata for reports submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format.
JIPK offer authors the possibility to publish review reports with their paper and for Reviewers to sign their open review reports; however, JIPK will not reveal reviewer names until publication and only with their explicit agreement. Further information can be found in Open Peer-Review Option.
Readers who have concerns or complaints about published papers should first contact the corresponding author to attempt a resolution directly, before contacting the Editorial Office.
The Editorial Office may be contacted in cases where it is not appropriate to contact the authors, if the authors were not responsive, or if the concerns were not resolved. The Editorial Office will coordinate with the complainant, author/s and Editors-in-Chief or Editorial Board members for the investigation, remedy or resolution of any concerns or complaints.
Complaints, comments, or update requests relating to scholarly validity, ethical or legal aspects of either the paper or its review process will be investigated further where appropriate. All complaints, comments or update requests relating to published papers are investigated by the Editorial Office with the support of the Editorial Board and final approval by the Editor-in-Chief. For ethical concerns, final decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board members who are supported by the Editorial Office to promote adherence to core principles of publication ethics as expressed by the COPE. Other persons and institutions will be consulted as necessary, including university authorities, or experts in the field. Legal counsel may be sought where the complaint has legal implications.
Personal comments or criticisms will not be entertained. All complaints are investigated, including anonymous complaints. Complainants may request that the Editorial Office handle their complaint confidentially and the Editorial Office, any Editors-in-Chief or other Editorial Board members will attempt to do so insofar as is appropriate and in accordance with our internal procedures.
Decisions about Corrections, Comments and Replies, Expressions of Concerns, or Retractions resulting from an investigation are made by Editors-in-Chief, Section Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Board members, and communicated to authors. All updates are required to follow our policy on Updating Published Papers.
If a complaint is not considered to be substantiated, then further communication will only be considered if additional information evidencing concerns is presented.
Complainants might not be updated about the status of an investigation until a final decision has been reached, however complainants will be notified if an update is published. The Editorial Office and Editorial Board members are under no obligation to present further detail. Communication will be ended where it is not considered cordial or respectful. Readers with complaints or concerns should be aware that investigations take time to conduct.
When raising concerns to the Editorial Office, please use the Contact Form or contact details below, and, in addition to details about the paper, please also include details of the complaint, its scholarly, scientific or academic validity, a summary of the main points and any other issues, details of any correspondence already had with the authors and a statement clarifying any actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest.
JIPK recognizes our responsibility to correct scientifically relevant errors, or ethical issues that have been brought to our attention. To offer transparency regarding any changes for our authors and readers, we have the following standardized criteria in place for updates to any of our published papers.
Minor errors that do not affect readability or meaning (e.g., spelling, grammatical, spacing errors) do not qualify for an update, regardless of when or by whom the error was introduced.
Requests to correct errors in a paper’s metadata (e.g., title, author name, abstract) can be completed, if deemed by the Editorial Office to be a reasonable request. Once approved, the paper will be updated and re-published on our website. Following this, all relevant indexing databases will be notified to ensure that the database versions have also been revised.
Requests to correct errors in the following cases can be completed, but must also include the publication of a Correction notice:
- Errors that could affect the scientific interpretation. For example:
- error in a misleading section of an otherwise reliable publication
- error in data or interpretation (that does not affect final conclusions)
- Scientifically relevant formatting changes. For example:
- missing or unclear figures/tables
- Addition or removal of an author from authorship list (including addition or removal of entire affiliations)
- Addition or removal of an entire reference
- Addition or removal of a significant amount of text within the back matter. For example:
- funding, author contributions, acknowledgements
Once the update request has been approved, the paper will be updated and re-published on our website, along with the publication of a Correction. This notice is a separate publication that links to the updated paper, but is published in the most current Issue of the journal. The Correction serves the purpose to notify all readers that a significant change has occurred to the paper, and that the revised version is now available on the website. Following these updates, all relevant indexing databases will be notified to ensure that the database versions have also been revised.
Sometimes a paper needs to be retracted from the body of research literature. This could be due to inadvertent errors made during the research process, gross ethical breaches, fabrication of data, large amounts of plagiarism, or other reasons. Such articles threaten the integrity of scientific records and need to be retracted.
JIPK follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for retraction.
If a Retraction is published, the original publication is amended with a “RETRACTED” watermark, but will still be available on the journal’s website for future reference. However, retracted articles should not be cited and used for further research, as they cannot be relied upon. Retractions are published using the same authorship and affiliation as the paper being retracted, so that the notice and the original retracted paper can be properly found by readers within indexing databases. The Retraction notice will also be published in the current Issue of the journal. Partial Retractions might be published in cases where results are only partially wrong.
A paper will only be completely removed from JIPK’s website and relevant indexing databases in very exceptional circumstances, where leaving it online would constitute an illegal act or be likely to lead to significant harm (Read more).
Expression of Concern
For complex, inconclusive, or prolonged situations, an Expression of Concern may be published. If investigations into alleged or suspected research misconduct have not yet been completed or prove to be inconclusive, an editor or journal may wish to publish an Expression of Concern, detailing the points of concern and what actions, if any, are in progress.
Comments and Replies
If a reader has concerns about the reported results or methods used in a specific paper, they should approach the journal’s Editorial Office and if deemed reasonable, a Comment may be submitted for potential publication. Comments are short letters to the editors from readers who would like to publicly question a specific paper.
Once a Comment is approved for further peer review, the Editorial Office will then approach the authors of the paper in question and invite them to prepare a Reply to this Comment. The Reply allows the authors to publicly respond to the concerns pointed out by the reader. If the reader’s complaints are substantiated, and the authors are not able to adequately respond to the concerns, a Correction of the original paper may be published, or the paper can be retracted entirely. If authors do not provide a response by the deadline provided, or decide not to respond, the Comment may be published alongside a note that explains the absence of the Reply.
Both Comments and Replies will be reviewed to ensure that:
- the Comment addresses significant aspects of the original paper without becoming essentially a new paper;
- the Reply responds directly to any concerns, without becoming evasive;
- the tone of both publications is appropriate for a scientific journal.
While Comments can criticize the work, they should not criticize the work’s authors. Comments should not reiterate previously published disagreements. No more than one round of Comment and Reply will be facilitated where that discussion is from the same reader/s. JIPK only accept the submission of Comments on articles that were published by JIPK.
Further discussion may be recommended to take place via email at firstname.lastname@example.org.
JIPK works closely with authors and editors to promote adherence to core principles of publication ethics, as expressed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We encourage the use of COPE resources, available on their website. All manuscripts should confirm to standards of ethical behaviour. Where we become aware of ethical issues, we are committed to investigating and taking necessary action to maintain the integrity of the literature.
Should you have any concerns about a published manuscript, we encourage you to use this form, providing as much information as possible. A member of our team will then be in touch. You can get in touch via email
Editorial Manager: Rozi