Publication Ethics

Business, Accounting, and Knowledge Journal is committed to fulfilling and maintaining high ethical standards for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, including the prevention of research and publication misconduct, and also takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidelines, as follows:

1. Allegations of misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors or reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record. The handling of allegations of misconduct in our journal can be divided into two situations. The first is an allegation against the author, and the second is an allegation against a reviewer or editor. If an author has been accused of potential misconduct, such as plagiarism, or if their article has already been published elsewhere, an independent investigation will be conducted into the allegation. Should the allegation be found to be valid, the alleged author will be blacklisted, and his or her article will be withdrawn from our publication. The alleged author will also be required to provide a formally written statement of apology, which will be posted on our announcement platform on our website. Similarly, in the case of an allegation against a reviewer or editor, an independent investigation will also be performed accordingly. Should the allegation against the reviewer and editor be found to be valid, the said reviewer and editor will no longer be participating in any of our journal activities.

2. Authorship and contributorship

Authors are responsible for providing original research that has not been submitted or published elsewhere. The authors are also responsible for providing accurate and detailed data when requested. When reproducing data from other sources, proper citation and permission are required.

3. Complaints and appeals

The Business, Accounting, and Knowledge Journal is committed to treating any complaints and appeals fairly, promptly, and independently. For instance, reasonable complaints against the reviewer will be handled by the chief editor, and any complaint against the chief editor will be handled by the publisher.

4. Conflicts of interest or competing interests

A conflict of interest is possible to occur when the author has a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations or with the people working with them that could influence their research. Therefore, authors are required to provide full disclosure about any potential conflicts of interest in a cover letter. The detailed financial sources supporting the work should also be fully acknowledged. The editor may decide not to publish your article based on any declared conflict. 

Duties of Authors
1. Reporting standards

The authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.

2. Originality and plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors’ own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.

3. Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publications

The author should not, in general, submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such, and the primary publication should be referenced.

4. Acknowledgement of sources

Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.

5. Authorship of the paper

The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors, those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.

6. Disclosures and conflicts of interest

All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

7. Fundamental errors in published works

If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

8. Hazards and human or animal subjects

The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of the Editor
1. Publication decisions

Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.

2. Review of manuscripts

The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

3. Fair play

The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to the sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position when making decisions about publications, which makes it very important that this process be as fair and unbiased as possible.

4. Confidentiality

The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented and consent for publication, where applicable.

5. Disclosures and conflicts of interest

The editor of the journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest.


Duties of Reviewers
1. Confidentiality

Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

2. Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
Standards of Objectivity: The review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow the journals' instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to supporting claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work.

3. Disclosure and conflict of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s), notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.

4. Promptness

The reviewers should respond in a reasonable timeframe. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete the review of the manuscript within the stipulated time, then this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.