I-POLAF · EDITORIAL POLICIES

Publication Decisions

The editor of I-POLAF is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. These decisions must be based on the academic quality, validity, originality, and significance of the work for researchers and readers. Editors may be guided by the journal's editorial policies and must comply with applicable legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors and reviewers when making publication decisions.

Fair Play

Editors must evaluate manuscripts according to their intellectual and scholarly merit, without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate to the editorial process.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the author's express written consent. Editors must handle potential conflicts of interest responsibly to protect the fairness and integrity of editorial decisions.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making informed editorial decisions. Through constructive feedback, reviewers may also help authors improve the quality, clarity, and scholarly contribution of their manuscripts.

Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to assess a manuscript or are unable to complete the review within the expected timeframe should notify the editor promptly and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared with others or discussed outside the authorized review process without the editor's permission.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their assessments clearly and support their arguments with relevant evidence or scholarly reasoning.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Statements, observations, or arguments previously reported should be supported by appropriate citations. Reviewers should also inform editors of substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and other work of which they are aware.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained during peer review must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts when competitive, collaborative, personal, or other relationships with authors, companies, or institutions create a conflict of interest.

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must present an accurate account of their work and an objective discussion of its significance. Research data must be represented accurately, and manuscripts should provide sufficient detail and references to enable appropriate evaluation and, where applicable, replication. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical conduct and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide relevant raw data for editorial review. Where practicable and consistent with applicable ethical, legal, and confidentiality requirements, authors should be prepared to provide access to supporting data and retain it for a reasonable period after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is original. Any use of another person's words, ideas, data, or other contributions must be appropriately acknowledged, cited, or quoted. Plagiarism and other forms of misappropriation of scholarly work are unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors should not publish substantially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical publishing conduct and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others. Publications that have significantly influenced the reported research should be cited appropriately.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Those who have made substantial contributions should be identified as co-authors, while other relevant contributions should be acknowledged appropriately.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors, and no inappropriate co-authors, are included. All co-authors should have reviewed and approved the final manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

Authors must clearly identify any unusual hazards associated with chemicals, procedures, or equipment used in their research. Research involving human participants or animals should be conducted in accordance with applicable ethical requirements and relevant approvals.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors should disclose financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived to influence their research, its results, or its interpretation. All sources of financial support for the research should also be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article as appropriate.