Trends of Humanities and Social Sciences Research
Publication Ethics
Ethical Standards of the Publication Ethics Committee of Trends of Humanities and Social Sciences Research
Ethics and Responsibilities of Editors
Editors are responsible for all content published in the journal under their supervision. Their responsibilities include the following:
1. Manage and operate the journal in accordance with its objectives and principles of good governance.
2. Maintain and ensure academic quality standards for all published works.
3. Promote and support authors’ freedom of academic expression, provided that such expression does not violate applicable laws or public morals.
4. Continuously improve the quality of the journal in terms of its format, content, and editorial processes, in accordance with advances in academic knowledge and modern technology.
Editorial Ethics
Provide readers with detailed information about published academic and research works, including the authors’ names, institutional affiliations, sources or origins of the academic and research works, and other relevant information.
1. Editors shall conduct a preliminary assessment of submitted manuscripts before they undergo the formal peer-review process for publication in the journal.
2. Editors shall maintain the confidentiality of information concerning both authors and reviewers throughout the manuscript evaluation process.
3. Editors shall consider and make publication decisions only after the manuscript has undergone the journal’s peer-review process, based on the journal’s evaluation criteria, including the manuscript’s significance, contribution of new knowledge, clarity, and alignment with the journal’s scope and objectives.
4. Editors shall not publish manuscripts that have been published elsewhere, including duplicate or redundant publications.
5. Editors shall not reject a manuscript solely on the basis of suspicion or uncertainty. Any concerns regarding a manuscript must first be investigated and supported by sufficient evidence before a publication decision is made.
6. Editors shall avoid conflicts of interest with authors, co-authors, reviewers, and journal administrators.
7. Editors shall screen submitted manuscripts for plagiarism using reliable plagiarism-detection software to ensure that manuscripts submitted for publication do not contain plagiarized material. If plagiarism is detected, the journal shall suspend the manuscript from further peer review and promptly notify the corresponding author to provide an explanation. The manuscript will then be considered for acceptance or rejection in accordance with the journal’s established procedures.
8. Editors shall clearly communicate the journal’s publication process in writing at every stage, including manuscript formatting requirements, preliminary screening, peer review by at least two qualified reviewers, and notification of the review outcome to the authors. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
9. Editors and the editorial board shall evaluate the academic and research quality of manuscripts based on the accuracy, appropriateness, and clarity of the content and research methodology, as well as the relevance of the manuscript to current circumstances and the objectives and scope of the journal.
10. In cases where authors disagree with reviewers’ comments or recommendations, they may appeal or provide a written clarification addressing the disputed issues to the editorial board within 30 days from the date of receiving the review results.
Ethics and Responsibilities of Authors
1. Authors must certify that their manuscript has not been previously published, submitted for publication, or is not currently under consideration by another journal.
2. Authors should prepare their manuscripts in accordance with the journal’s prescribed format and requirements, as specified in the “Instructions for Authors.”
3. Authors must report their research findings accurately and honestly and must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or otherwise misrepresent research data or findings.
4. When authors use or cite the work of others, they must properly acknowledge the original sources, including appropriate in-text citations and complete references in the reference list.
5. Authors must include the names of all individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research and manuscript and must not list individuals who have not contributed to the work as authors.
6. Authors must disclose all sources of research funding or financial support for the study and include this information at the end of the manuscript.
7. Authors must clearly disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in connection with the research or publication of the manuscript.
8. If the research involves animals, human participants, or interviewees, particularly where the research concerns sensitive information or may affect the participants or informants, authors must strictly comply with applicable ethical principles, laws, regulations, and institutional requirements. Informed consent must be obtained before data collection or the disclosure of relevant information, and appropriate ethical approval or supporting documentation, such as a certificate of approval from a Human Research Ethics Committee or an Animal Research Ethics Committee, must be obtained and provided where applicable.
Ethics and Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts they are assigned to evaluate and must not disclose, share, or provide any information from the manuscript to others during the review process.
2. Reviewers must disclose any potential conflict of interest with the authors or the manuscript. For example, if they have collaborated with the authors, have a personal relationship with them, or have any other reason that may prevent them from providing an impartial evaluation, they should promptly notify the editor or editorial board and decline the review assignment.
3. Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts within their areas of expertise and specialization, considering the manuscript’s significance, quality, rigor, and the accuracy of its analysis. Decisions should be based on objective academic criteria and evidence, rather than personal opinions, emotions, or unsupported judgments.
4. Reviewers should provide constructive and academically relevant comments and recommendations, particularly by identifying important and relevant literature or issues that the authors may have overlooked or failed to cite.
5. If reviewers identify any substantial similarity, duplication, or overlap between the manuscript under review and another published or submitted work, they must promptly notify the editor or editorial board.
