Guidelines on the Ethics of Journal Publishing

Taylor & Francis Group is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All Taylor & Francis' journals have the opportunity to benefit from the support offered by COPE. The committee works with scientific journal editors to help them improve their skills and the quality of their publications.

About COPE www.publicationethics.org.uk

The ethical guidelines we describe here are designed to help everyone engaged in the journal publication process, namely, editors, authors, and manuscript reviewers and referees.

We are confident that unambiguous and consistent guidelines will enhance the quality of published research, and ensure a process is in place to respond to a situation where ethics may have been transgressed.

Editors
Our advice to editors is to make every reasonable effort to ensure the following criteria are taken into account for those submitted manuscripts they deem worthy of consideration by peer review.

• Unbiased consideration should be given to each manuscript, judging each on its merits without regard to the race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author.
• Manuscripts should be dealt with and processed with reasonable speed and efficiency.
• Editors have sole responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript. Whilst an editor may seek guidance via peer review, she or he may reject a manuscript without review if considered inappropriate for the journal.
• The peer review process must be confidential and rendered anonymous unless explicitly stated otherwise.
• Conflicts of interest must be declared.
• If an editor receives a challenge to the authenticity of a published article, she or he will consult Taylor & Francis, and where appropriate members of the editorial board, in confidence. Where the editor and Taylor & Francis subsequently secure evidence that authenticity has been compromised, in any of the following ways:
  • the main substance of a published article is erroneous;
  • the article contains material which has not been properly acknowledged or cited;
  • the article's authorship is incorrect or incomplete;
  • the article contains a libel;
  the editor and Taylor & Francis will facilitate publication of an appropriate correction, a Statement of Retraction, or, in extremis, the withdrawal and removal of the article.

Authors

• Authors must present an accurate account of the research performed, and offer an objective discussion of its significance.
• The article must contain sufficient detail and reference to public sources of information to permit the author's peers to repeat the work.
• Authors must cite all relevant references.
• Authors must identify any hazards inherent in conducting the research.
• Authors must declare conflicts of interest.
• Authors must avoid fragmenting research to maximize the number of articles submitted.
• Authors must not submit the same or similar articles to any other journal or publication medium.
• Whilst an experimental or theoretical study may sometimes justify criticism of the work of another scientist, in no circumstances is personal criticism appropriate.
• "Co-authors" are defined as any person who has made a significant scientific contribution to the work reported, and who shares responsibility and accountability for the results.

Referees and Peer Reviewers
We ask referees and peer reviewers to make every reasonable effort to ensure the following criteria are taken into account for those submitted manuscripts they have agreed to peer review

• Unbiased consideration should be given to each manuscript, judging each on its merits without regard to the race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author.
• Manuscripts should be dealt with and processed with reasonable speed and efficiency.
• The quality of the manuscript, and its experimental and theoretical work, its interpretations, and its exposition, will be judged objectively.
• The peer review process will be kept confidential.
• Conflicts of interest must be declared.
• Referees' judgments must be explained and supported. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported must be accompanied by the relevant citation, and unsupported assertions must be avoided.
• Whilst the review of a manuscript may justify criticism, even severe criticism, under no circumstances is personal or malicious criticism of the author appropriate or acceptable.