Ethical Procedures

Ethics for Authors

It is understood that the authors listed in the journal article have all made a significant contribution to the research article. This contribution may exist in form of research design, data acquisition or analysis, or help design, shape, and report the research work. Every author, may it be the primary author or secondary author share the responsibility of the content and improvement of the manuscript.

Unethical Practices by Authors

  1. Gift Authorship: The primary authors add people as authors to oblige them but they have no part in writing the paper.
  2. Ghost Authorship: The authors want to at times take full credit of the article that have been submitted and they do not include the names of the people of authors who have made a significant contribution in the reported work.
  3. Plagiarism: “When somebody presents the work of others (data, words or theories) as if they were his/her own and without proper acknowledgment.” Committee of Publications Ethics (COPE). When citing any work either your own or of any other author, ensure that the verbatim is quoted the in double quotation marks and attributed to the authors through in-text citation and referencing. Similarly, any idea, result, figure or table that belongs to another author must be attributed to them using the in-text citation and referencing.
  4. Avoid Self-plagiarism: Self-plagiarism takes place when one uses his/her own work redundantly without properly citing and referencing it. This is a cause of repetition in the academic literature and is responsible for skewness in the meta-analysis of the data sets. It is thus mandatory to cite and reference your work whenever you discuss it in your papers.

  5. Data fabrication/falsification: It is important that the data which you present in your paper is authentic/original or has been taken from the source that you have mentioned in your article. In case JoEED feels that the data posed is in some way lacking then JoEED has the right to ask the authors to provide raw data.

  6. Conflicts of Interest: It is very important for the authors to inform JoEED about any conflict of interest whether it is direct or indirect in form of funding, supply of equipment or material, or any other support. It will help JoEED gauge any bias or skewness in your research. A conflict of interest can occur when you (or your employer or sponsor) have a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations, or with the people working with them, that could influence your research. You can disclose your conflict of interest by writing to the JoEED editor at education.journal@iobm.edu.pk.

  7. Allegations of Misconduct. Authors are required to read the journal’s author instructions and ethical policies carefully and to adhere to the terms before submission. While authors are given the option to suggest potential reviewers for the peer-review process, the qualifications and potential conflicts of interest of all reviewers will be carefully checked before they are invited to review.

    Report of research misconduct may be related to a published article or a manuscript under the peer-review process. The procedure for the application and management of complaints of author misconduct should proceed with sensitivity, tact, confidence, and in the following manner:

    1. The editorial office of the journal receives a complaint that an article submitted to or published in the journal is suspected of containing research misconduct.
    2. The complainant needs to clearly indicate the specific manner and detail of misconduct; for example, in a case of plagiarism, the plagiarized paragraph should be clearly highlighted and the original and suspected articles should be referred to clearly.
    3. The editorial office will conduct an investigation, during which time the editor of the journal and the corresponding author(s) of the suspected article will be in contact.
    4. The corresponding author(s) will be asked to provide an explanation with factual statements and any available evidence.
    5. If the author(s) of the suspected article accepts the misconduct complaint, the editorial office will take the following actions depending on the  situation:
      1. If the article has been published, an erratum or retraction may be necessary to remedy the situation. However, there may still be disagreement concerning the appropriate wording of the description.
      2. If the misconduct is reported during the review process, the review process may continue, with the author(s) making the relevant changes.
    6. In the case of nonresponse in the stipulated time or an unsatisfactory explanation, the article may be permanently retracted or rejected. Before making a decision, confirmation will be sought from the experts of the relevant institution or other authorities as required.
    7. The complainant will be informed of the outcome once the issue is resolved.