Publication Ethics

Journal of Excellence in Social Sciences (JESS)
Publisher: SMARCONS (Private) Limited

The Journal of Excellence in Social Sciences (JESS) promotes responsible research, fair editorial assessment, transparent publishing, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, guest editors, and the publisher. It covers regular submissions, invited scholarly articles, special issues, and published content.

JESS uses relevant COPE guidance when addressing ethical concerns and supports the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Following COPE guidance does not imply COPE membership.

1. Author Responsibilities and Originality

Authors must submit work that is accurately reported, appropriately attributed, and consistent with applicable research ethics requirements.

Submission confirms that:

All listed authors approve the manuscript and its submission;
Authorship and contributions are accurately reported;
The manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal;
Previous dissemination and substantial overlap with other work are disclosed;
Data, methods, findings, and limitations are reported honestly;
Relevant funding and conflicts of interest are disclosed; and
Third-party material is used lawfully.

Authors must promptly inform the journal if they identify a significant error or ethical concern before or after publication.

2. Authorship and Contributions

Every listed author must meet all four authorship criteria adopted by JESS:

Make a substantial contribution to the conception or design of the work, or to acquiring, analysing, or interpreting its data.
Draft the manuscript or critically review it for important intellectual content.
Approve the final version to be published.
Accept accountability for the work and cooperate in investigating and resolving questions about its accuracy or integrity.

Every scholarly submission must include an Author Contributions statement using the CRediT taxonomy, approved by all authors.

CRediT describes contributions; it does not independently establish eligibility for authorship.

Funding acquisition, general supervision, administrative assistance, technical support, language editing, or proofreading alone does not qualify an individual for authorship.

Contributors who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged, with their permission. Ghost, gift, honorary, guest, and purchased authorship are prohibited.

Authorship changes require an explanation, an updated contribution statement, and signed agreement from all affected authors. Published authorship changes are documented through correction notices.

Detailed requirements are provided in the Author Credit Policy.

3. Peer Review and Editorial Independence

JESS follows double-blind peer review.

Every scholarly manuscript proceeding to external review must receive completed assessments from at least two independent external reviewers before acceptance.

The same requirements apply to invited scholarly articles and special-issue submissions. Invitations and inclusion in special issues do not guarantee acceptance.

Editors make decisions based on scholarly merit, methodological quality, relevance, and ethical integrity. Decisions are independent of authors’ nationality, institutional status, personal relationships, or ability to pay publication-related charges.

Reviewers and editors must protect confidentiality, disclose conflicts of interest, and avoid using unpublished information for personal advantage.

Further requirements are provided in the Peer Review Policy.

4. Editor and Guest-Editor Submissions

Manuscripts authored by editors, editorial board members, reviewers, or guest editors are subject to the journal’s standard independent review requirements.

An editor without a relevant conflict of interest must handle the submission. An author associated with the journal must not select reviewers, access confidential information through editorial privileges, or influence decisions concerning their own manuscript.

Guest editors are supervised by the Editor-in-Chief or designated editorial board members. Their credentials and expertise must be checked before appointment.

The internal-authorship and guest-editor contribution limits specified in the Peer Review Policy apply.

5. AI and Automated Tools Used by Authors

AI tools, chatbots, and large language models must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, analysis, and conclusions of their work.

JESS applies the following rules:

Generative AI must not replace authors’ intellectual work by drafting substantive scholarly content, such as arguments, literature reviews, interpretations, or conclusions.
AI-assisted language improvement of author-written text is permitted, provided it does not introduce unsupported claims or alter the intended meaning.
AI-assisted analytical tools may be used where methodologically appropriate, with validation and transparent reporting.
Fabricating data, observations, results, references, or quotations using AI is prohibited.
AI-generated images are not accepted for publication.
Textual AI outputs may be reproduced as research objects or examples for critique where clearly identified and methodologically justified. They must not be treated as authoritative evidence.

Authors must disclose permitted generative AI use beyond basic spelling and grammar checking. The disclosure must identify the tool, version where available, purpose, and affected parts of the work. Analytical uses belong in the Methods section; language assistance may be disclosed in an acknowledgement or dedicated statement.

Authors must verify underlying sources directly. Generative AI must not be cited as an authoritative scholarly source.

Disclosure does not make a prohibited use permissible.

6. AI and Automated Tools in Peer Review

Reviewers and editors must not use generative AI to produce substantive peer-review assessments or make editorial decisions.

They must not upload confidential manuscripts, unpublished data, figures, supplementary files, or review reports to generative AI services, including for editing or rewriting.

The journal may use authorised automated tools for routine technical and integrity checks, such as text-similarity screening, with appropriate confidentiality and data-protection safeguards.

Automated findings must be evaluated by a responsible editor. They must not serve as the sole basis for acceptance, rejection, or a finding of misconduct.

Routine use of automated tools is disclosed through the journal’s applicable policies. Human reviewers and editors remain accountable for their assessments and decisions.

7. Plagiarism, Attribution, and Text Recycling

Authors must acknowledge the sources of ideas, data, methods, words, figures, and other material used in their work.

Direct quotations must be clearly identified and attributed. Paraphrasing does not remove the obligation to cite the source.

JESS screens submissions using Turnitin, as described in its Plagiarism Policy. Editors interpret similarity reports in context; a similarity percentage alone does not establish or exclude plagiarism.

The similarity thresholds stated in the Plagiarism Policy are screening criteria, not permission to reproduce unattributed material below those thresholds.

Reuse of authors’ previous text, data, or findings must be disclosed and appropriately cited. Substantial undisclosed overlap or presentation of previously published findings as new may constitute redundant publication.

Concerns are assessed fairly before appropriate editorial action is taken.

8. Previous Dissemination and Duplicate Submission

Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is prohibited.

Authors must disclose related manuscripts and previous dissemination, including preprints, conference abstracts, presentations, theses, and conference papers.

A preprint does not, by itself, constitute duplicate journal publication. Its existence must be disclosed, and the published version should subsequently be linked where possible.

A manuscript developed from a previously published conference paper must disclose and cite the earlier work and clearly explain its additional contribution. Substantial overlap is assessed by the editor.

Methodologically sound replication studies may be considered when their purpose, relationship to earlier research, and contribution are clearly explained.

9. Citation Integrity

Citations must be relevant, accurate, and justified by the scholarly content.

Authors, reviewers, and editors must not manipulate citations to benefit an individual, group, journal, or publisher.

Prohibited practices include:

Coercive requests for irrelevant citations;
Unnecessary citations intended to inflate metrics;
Coordinated citation exchanges; and
Fabricated or unverified references.

Self-citation is acceptable where relevant. The journal assesses relevance and context rather than imposing an arbitrary numerical limit.

Authors may report suspected coercive citation confidentially to the editorial office or Ethics Committee.

10. Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial and non-financial relationships that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, their impartiality.

Examples include employment, consultancy, financial interests, personal relationships, recent collaboration, academic competition, and relevant institutional relationships.

Authors must provide a conflict-of-interest declaration, including a statement where no relevant conflicts exist.

Funding statements must identify support received and explain the funder’s role in study design, data collection, analysis, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions.

Editors and reviewers whose impartiality is compromised must not assess or decide on the affected manuscript.

11. Ethical Approval and Oversight

Research must comply with applicable institutional, disciplinary, and national requirements.

Where ethical approval is required, it must be obtained before the relevant research begins. Authors must report:

The approving committee or authority;
The approval reference, where issued;
The approval date; and
Relevant ethical standards followed.

Where approval was not required or an exemption applies, authors must explain the basis and identify the authority granting an exemption where applicable. Research involving human participants is not automatically exempt merely because it is non-medical or uses anonymised data.

Animal research, where relevant to the journal’s scope, must have appropriate approval and follow applicable welfare requirements.

For double-blind review, identifying approval details may be supplied separately or temporarily anonymised, while remaining available to the editorial office. Complete required details must appear in the published article.

12. Informed Consent and Participant Protection

Authors must obtain informed consent where required and explain how it was obtained.

Participants should receive appropriate information about the research purpose, procedures, risks, confidentiality, data use, and their rights.

Where consent has been waived, authors must report the waiver and its ethical basis.

Research involving children, vulnerable participants, or sensitive information requires appropriate safeguards and any necessary parental, guardian, or representative consent and participant assent.

Confidential participant information must not be included unnecessarily in submissions or supplementary files.

13. Consent to Publication

Consent to participate in research is distinct from consent to publish identifiable information.

Authors must obtain appropriate consent before publishing identifiable participant details, images, recordings, quotations, or case material where identification is possible and consent is required.

Authors must retain documentation and provide confirmation through an appropriately confidential process if requested.

Signed consent documents containing personal information must not be uploaded as publicly accessible supplementary material.

14. Data Sharing and Reproducibility

Authors must describe their methods sufficiently to support evaluation and, where practicable, reproducibility.

Empirical articles must include a Data Availability Statement explaining:

Where supporting data or materials can be accessed;
Any conditions governing access; or
Why access is restricted or unavailable.

Authors are encouraged to deposit suitable data, code, instruments, and supporting materials in recognised repositories.

Sharing must respect participant consent, privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, and applicable restrictions. Restricted data must not be made public merely to satisfy a sharing request.

The journal may request supporting records during assessment or investigation. Authors must explain any restrictions and cooperate through an appropriate confidential process.

For articles without associated datasets, the statement should indicate that data sharing is not applicable.

15. Third-Party Data and Materials

Authors must establish a lawful basis for using third-party datasets and comply with their licences, access conditions, and consent restrictions.

Public availability does not automatically establish unrestricted reuse rights.

Authors must cite datasets and obtain permission where required. A dataset owner’s permission does not override participant privacy or ethical obligations.

For copyrighted figures, tables, images, instruments, or other material, authors must obtain permission where necessary. Separate permission may not be required where a suitable licence or applicable exception permits the use.

Material excluded from the article’s CC BY licence must be clearly identified.

16. Fabrication, Falsification, and Image Integrity

Fabrication and falsification of data, results, participant records, or research documentation are prohibited.

Figures and images must accurately represent the underlying evidence. Processing must not conceal, introduce, or distort information in a misleading way.

Relevant processing methods must be disclosed, and original files retained where appropriate.

The journal may request original data or images when concerns arise. Suspicion alone is not treated as proof of misconduct.

17. Defamation, Privacy, and Responsible Criticism

Authors must avoid unlawful disclosures, serious privacy violations, and unsupported defamatory allegations.

Scholarly criticism of public information, policies, institutions, or published research must be evidence-based and expressed professionally.

Naming an organisation or discussing publicly available material does not automatically require that organisation’s consent. Consent or permission is required where the research design, confidentiality obligations, or applicable requirements make it necessary.

Identifiable participant information is governed by the consent and privacy provisions above.

Potentially serious legal or privacy concerns may be referred for appropriate specialist assessment.

18. Handling Misconduct Allegations

Anyone may report suspected misconduct with relevant supporting evidence.

The journal assesses credible concerns, including appropriately evidenced anonymous reports. A complainant’s identity or disagreement with the journal does not, by itself, determine whether a concern is investigated.

The process may include:

Initial assessment of the concern;
Preservation of relevant editorial records;
Requests for explanations and documentation;
Independent expert assessment where necessary;
Referral to relevant institutions or competent authorities; and
Appropriate editorial action.

Authors and other affected parties receive an opportunity to respond. Investigations are handled confidentially, with information shared as necessary.

Possible outcomes include no further action, revision, rejection, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or referral to an institution. Any restrictions on future participation must be proportionate and supported by the findings.

Good-faith reporting must not result in retaliation.

19. Complaints and Appeals

Complaints about editorial procedures, review conduct, confidentiality, conflicts of interest, or publication ethics may be sent to jess@smarcons.com.

Appeals against editorial decisions must identify a significant factual misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, or material evidence that warrants reconsideration.

JESS aims to acknowledge complaints and appeals within 10 working days. It aims to resolve editorial appeals within 60 days and other editorial-management complaints within 50 days, where practicable. Complex investigations may take longer; the journal provides updates where appropriate.

Cases are assigned without relevant conflicts of interest. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of a decision.

Abusive or threatening communication may be restricted, but credible research-integrity concerns are still assessed on their evidence.

20. Ethics Committee and Ombudsperson

The Ethics Committee provides oversight for unresolved ethical concerns and complaints.

Ethics Committee Chair: Mr. Asim Azhar
Email: ethics@smarcons.com

The Ombudsperson provides impartial mediation for appropriate disputes involving authors, reviewers, editors, or editorial procedures.

Ombudsperson: Dr. Hassan Shakeel
Email: ombudsperson@smarcons.com

Anyone with a relevant conflict must recuse themselves. Mediation does not replace institutional investigation or the journal’s responsibility to correct the scholarly record.

21. Post-Publication Discussion and Corrections

Readers may submit substantive critiques or concerns about published work to the editorial office. The journal evaluates evidence-based comments and may invite an author response or publish an appropriate notice or discussion.

Errors and integrity concerns are handled through corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions.

Published articles are normally retained in the scholarly record, including after retraction. Removal or redaction is reserved for exceptional legal, privacy, or serious health and safety circumstances.

Article records and public notices remain available to the extent legally and ethically permissible. Substantive changes are not made silently.

Detailed procedures are provided in the Post-Publication Correction and Retraction Policy.

22. Open Access, Copyright, and Preservation

Authors retain copyright, and published scholarly articles are distributed under CC BY 4.0, subject to clearly identified exclusions for third-party material.

Authors may share the submitted manuscript, accepted manuscript, and Version of Record without embargo, in accordance with the journal’s copyright and self-archiving policies.

PKP Preservation Network implementation is currently in progress. JESS does not claim confirmed preservation coverage until successful deposits have been verified.

DOIs support persistent identification and linking; they do not themselves preserve full-text articles.

23. Fees and Editorial Decisions

JESS currently charges no submission fees, article processing charges, or other mandatory publication fees, as described in its Article Processing Charges Policy.

Any future charges must be disclosed before implementation. Fees, waiver decisions, sponsorship, and commercial interests must not influence scholarly acceptance decisions.

24. Policy Consistency and Review

This policy operates alongside the journal’s:

The journal reviews these policies periodically and updates related pages consistently.

25. Contact

Editorial Office
Journal of Excellence in Social Sciences (JESS)
Email: jess@smarcons.com
Contact details: Journal Contact Page