:::

Journal Of Music Research

:::

Statement on Publication Ethics and Malpractice

 

Statement on Publication Ethics and Malpractice, Journal of Music Research

 

 

Journal of Music Research (ISSN: 2079-8857, DOI: 10.6244/JOMR) is a scholarly journal committed to publication of research papers on musical studies. Call for papers are open and all submissions peer-reviewed. Papers published by the Journal must conform to the standards of expected ethical behaviors. The Journal rejects manuscripts with plagiarized content, submission to multiple journals, containing fraudulent data, authored by a third party, or failing to reveal conflicts of interest. The Journal follows ethical standards of “Publishing Ethics” set up by Elsevier B.V. https://www.elsevier.com/about/company-information/policies/publishing-ethicsand COPE Committee of Publication Ethics)(http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines. In the procedures of peer review and publication, the editor in chief, the editorial board and the publisher abide by the guideline and criteria mentioned above to ensure that there would be no violation of publication ethics or related malpractice.

 

 

The following is an abridged version of ethical guidelines for editors, reviewers and authors:

 


 

Duties of Editors

 

1.      Publication Decision
Editors should decide whether a manuscript be accepted for publication based upon the result of peer review, the subject matter of the research, the impact or the importance to the readers. They should observe the related editorial procedures, norm and regulations. Editors can authorize reviewers to decide whether a manuscript should be published or not.    

2.      Fair play
Editors should judge the manuscripts according to their content and should not allow none-academic elements, such as race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nationality and political parties interfere with their evaluation.  

3.      Confidentiality
Editors and related persons should not reveal information about the manuscripts to related authors, reviewers, editing consultant or the publishers.


4.      Disclosure principle  

(1)  Without consent from the authors, the editors should not use the content of the manuscripts for their own research.

(2)   Suggestions and comments from the peer reviewers should be confidential and should not be appropriated for personal use.

(3)   When competition, cooperation or other conflicts of interests exist between the author of the manuscript, enterprises or organizations and the editors, the editors should avoid reviewing the manuscripts personally but entrust the review to a qualified third party.

(4)   Editors should demand all the authors and contributors of the manuscript to reveal related conflicts of interests. When conflicts of interests are found after the publication of the paper, either a statement of correction, an announcement of withdrawal of the paper, or a statement announcing the conflicts of interests should be published.    


(5)   Conflicts of interests
(1) The editors should ensure that the parties sponsoring or subsidizing the research should not interfere with the peer-review process and that the review standards remain the same.
(2) Financial subsidy and grant should meet the goal and value of scholarly research, not commercial interests.

(3) The editors should provide a clear statement when the published papers are not peer-reviewed.


(6)   Involvement and cooperation in investigations
When cases for violation of ethical norms are found or reported, the editors, publishers and dealers should take necessary actions, including contacting the author or related organizations and inform them of the fallacy. When violation of academic ethics is confirmed, the paper should be corrected, withdrawn or clarified with a written statement. Any ethical misconduct should be investigated thoroughly, even papers that are already published can be traced.


Duties of Reviewers

 

1.      Review ability
The reviewer, entrusted to conduct peer-review, should notify the Editorial Board or the Editor in Chief when they do not have the expertise required to carry out a proper assessment or when they cannot complete the review in a timely manner.



2.      Confidentiality
The reviewer should respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of the manuscript or its review except to the journal editors.


3.      Objectivity
The reviewer should be objective and constructive in their reviews by avoiding personal opinions and should support his/her criticisms or comments with concrete examples from the manuscript.

4.      Acknowledgment of sources
The review should be able to identify materials, including pre-existing investigations, surveys or related content used in the manuscript, that are not properly quoted or cited either in the main body or in the footnotes. The reviewer should provide proof of these malpractices and notify the editors if he/she finds substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and publications of other authors.


5.      Open Principle and Conflict of Interest
Without the consent of the author, the reviewer should not appropriate the content of the unpublished manuscript for his/her or others’ advantage. The reviewer should not agree to review the manuscript when potential conflicts of interests exist between the author, the enterprise, organization and other interested parties.


Duties of Authors

1.      Paper standards
The author must present related research data, describe the process of the experiment or study accurately, and present the result of the research objectively and precisely. Significant details of the research methodology should be explicated and important references should be documented to help other researchers as they continue follow-up research. The author should not violate laws and moral codes, such as to deceive, to mislead or to use inaccurate or untrue statements.  

2.      Data access and retention
The author must keep the original research or experiment data and offer them as reference for the reviewers in the peer-reviewing process. After the publication of the paper, the information is open for public reference.


3.      Originality and plagiarism
The author must ensure that the paper is original; when statements of other authors are used, they should be accurately cited. Plagiarism and appropriation, including using others research result as one’s own, copying or duplicating the main points or counterfeiting other works, are unethical and illegal.


4.      Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
The author should not publish the same or similar papers in more than one journals or other publications. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals violates the ethical norm of publication. In principle, published papers should not be submitted to other journals, but can have secondary publication under certain conditions. The author and the editors of the journal should consent to the secondary publication, in which the data and thesis should be the same as the original paper and the information of the original publication should be included in the bibliography.  


5.      Acknowledgement of sources
The author has the responsibility to identify passages quoted from other authors and should list the factors which influence the research. Private information not open to the public, such as, dialogues, letters, discussion with a third party should not be used in the paper without the personal written authorization of the source. Information collected when reviewing others’ work (manuscript or proposal for applying research grants) should not be used or publicized without the written authorization of the original author.


6.      Authorship of the paper
Those who contribute significantly to the conception, design and execution of the paper should be listed as co-authors; others who participate in the research project should be included too. The corresponding author should ensure those who contribute to the research are on the author list while those who do not are excluded. The corresponding author should also confirm that all the co-authors examine the paper and consent to its publication. 


7.      Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the research involves seriously harmful chemicals, procedures or facilities, the author should describe them in details. If the research project involves human or animal subjects, the author should specify the procedures and observe the related governing laws and norms. When human subjects are involved, the author must include a statement of consent of human subjects in the paper and should protect the privacy of the subjects for an indefinite duration.   


8.      Disclosure and conflicts of interest
The author must publicly announce all items of conflicts of interest that are considered to influence the result of the research, including financial subsidy, research grant, employee/employer relationship, consultant, propriety of materials and objects, rewards, payment for professional testimony, patent application/registration, donation and authorization. Information about foreseeable conflicts of interest should be provided as early as possible.   


9.      Fundamental errors in published works
When the author finds that the paper contains mistakes or incorrect information, he/she should take the initiative to notify the editors immediately and should either withdraw the paper or make corrections. If the editors learn that the paper contains major mistakes through a third party, the author should not only take the above-mentioned actions but also should provide the editors the accurate information.

cron web_use_log