Publication Ethics and Malpractice

Standards we follow

Every Calm Publika journal follows the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and, for questions about misconduct, COPE's flowcharts. We expect honesty, fairness, transparency and accountability from everyone involved in publishing: authors, reviewers, editors, the editorial office and the publisher itself.

These rules apply to the conduct of research and writing as well as to the manuscript itself. Where a study involves people, animals or sensitive data, authors must follow the law and ethical rules that apply where the work was done.

What we expect of authors

• Honest, original work. The manuscript reports work the authors did, is not published or under review elsewhere, and credits other people's ideas, words and data properly. See the Originality policy.
• Accurate reporting. Sources are cited accurately, quotations are exact, translations are marked as the author's own where they are, and data, if any, are not fabricated, falsified or selectively presented.
• Authorship that reflects contribution. Everyone listed as an author made a substantial contribution to the work, approved the final version and accepts responsibility for it; nobody who qualifies is left out. Honorary, gift and ghost authorship are not acceptable. Changes to the author list after submission need the written agreement of every author, and the editor must approve them.
• Disclosure. Authors declare funding, any financial or personal relationship that could reasonably be seen to affect the work, and any connection with the parties in a case or a policy they discuss.
• Ethical conduct of research. Where the work involves interviews, surveys, personal data or other human participants, the manuscript states the approval or exemption obtained and how consent was handled.
• Responsible use of AI tools. As set out in the Generative AI policy.
• Prompt correction. An author who finds a significant error in their published work tells the journal at once, so that a correction or, if needed, a retraction can follow.
• No parallel or fragmented submission, and no citation manipulation. Authors do not submit the same work to several journals at once, split one study into several thin papers, or add citations to improve someone's metrics rather than to support the argument.

What we expect of reviewers

Reviewers keep manuscripts confidential, review objectively and on time, declare conflicts of interest, and do not use material from a manuscript for their own benefit. The detail is in the Peer Review policy. Reviewers who suspect misconduct in a manuscript tell the editor and do not investigate on their own.

What we expect of editors

• Decide on a manuscript's academic merit, free of bias based on the authors' identity, nationality, gender, religion, politics or institution, and free of commercial influence.
• Keep manuscripts and reviews confidential, and use unpublished material only with the author's consent.
• Step aside from any manuscript where they have a conflict, and make sure it is handled by someone independent.
• Make decisions in a reasonable time, explain them, and treat authors and reviewers with respect.
• Act on credible reports of misconduct and follow COPE guidance, even if it concerns a manuscript the journal has already published.
• Do not use a journal's own pages to inflate citations to the journal or to any person's work.

Research integrity

Misconduct includes plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, undisclosed duplicate publication, authorship abuse, breach of confidentiality, manipulation of the review process, citation manipulation, and misconduct in the conduct of the research itself. The journals treat as especially serious any attempt to manipulate peer review, for example by creating false reviewer identities or reviewing one's own paper, and respond as set out below.

For legal scholarship, integrity covers accurate use of authorities: citing cases, statutes and treaties as they actually say, and not relying on a source the author has not read.

How we handle concerns

1. Report. Anyone can raise a concern with the journal's editorial office or the publisher, through the contact form or by email. Anonymous concerns are considered if they contain enough detail to look into.
2. Assess. The editor-in-chief, or the publisher if the editor-in-chief is involved, first decides whether the concern is plausible and what evidence is needed. The people concerned are not told more than they need to know at this stage.
3. Investigate. The authors (or reviewers, or editors) concerned are told what is alleged and given a fair chance to answer in writing. The editor may consult the reviewers, outside experts, or the authors' institution.
4. Decide and act. Depending on what is found, the response can be a clarification, a correction, an expression of concern, a retraction, a ban on future submissions for a set period, or a report to the authors' institution, employer or funder. How published articles are changed is described in the Corrections and Retractions policy.
5. Record. The journal keeps a confidential record of the case and the reasons for the outcome.

A concern that is about a decision, not about misconduct, is a complaint or appeal.

Our commitment as publisher

The publisher protects the editors' independence, supports them in applying these rules, provides legal and ethical advice when needed, and makes sure that no commercial interest, including advertising or the ability to pay a fee, affects what is published. Calm Publika journals currently charge authors no fee.