Publishing Ethics and Malpractice Statement Summary
Transnational Marketing Journal follows the guidelines of publishing ethics. We value the importance of academic rigour and peer-review process in ensuring the development of a coherent and respected knowledge. These evaluations ensure the quality of work and referred to by the institutions and interested public. This community of academic publishing mainly involves the author(s), the journal editor, the peer reviewers, and the publishers.
Our editors have a duty to fair play, ensuring confidentiality, disclosing conflicts of interest where applicable and cooperation in investigations when needed regarding publication decisions in line with the editorial preferences and goals of the journals.
Reviewers are expected to contribute to editors’ decisions by promptly and objectively reviewing and commenting on the papers they are assigned to review while also maintaining confidentiality and disclosing conflicts of interest where applicable and known.
The peer review practice at Transnational Marketing Journal
Authors are required to abide to reporting standards, maintain the originality of submitted papers, avoid plagiarism as well as avoiding multiple submissions and concurrent publications. They are required to acknowledge resources and authorship of papers submitted. They are required to disclose any conflict of interest. Authors must disclose any fundamental errors in published works so these can be publicized and rectified if possible.
The Publisher is committed to ensuring objectivity in the academic review and publication process. Hence the Publisher avoids advertising, reprinting or other commercial interest that has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
Publishing Ethics Full Statement
Transnational Marketing Journal books and journals only consider publication if the following conditions are complied with:
- The research has been conducted with academic standards of rigour and integrity.
- The article/chapter/book/case study is original and/or justified to be republished, for instance, on grounds of reaching audiences in new disciplines/languages etc.
- The work has not been submitted elsewhere and is not under consideration with any other publication except conference papers and theses/dissertations.
- The work does not include libellous, defamatory or unlawful statements.
- Permission has been cleared for any third-party material included.
- Proof of consent has been obtained for any named individuals or organisations.
- Authorship has been agreed prior to submission and no one has been ‘gifted’ authorship or denied credit as an author (ghost authorship).
In the event of non-compliance with any of these conditions, we may remove or retract the work in line with the COPE guidelines.
We follow the COPE authorship guidelines regarding any authorship disputes. These issues may include:
- Ghost authorship – exclusion of a contributor from the list of authors.
- Gift/guest authorship – Inclusion of someone who hasn’t contributed to the work, or who has chosen not to be associated with the research.
- Disputes over the order of the authors and the level of contribution made by each author.
To be considered an author, someone need to have:
- Made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the obtaining/gathering, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work;
- Contributed to drafting of the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content;
- Given consent of the version to be published;
- Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Obtaining a grant to complete the work does not constitute authorship. These people can be included in the acknowledgements.
If and when needed, any authors listed should be able to identify each co-author’s contribution and have full confidence in the integrity of their work.
Regarding authorship disputes, our aim is to try to reach reach an agreement between the parties. If the authorship disputes can’t be resolved in such fashion, we may refer it to the authors’ institutions.
We discourage our authors to use excessive self-citations of their own previously published works. All citations in the work must be relevant, add value to the article, and should not be included just to increase the citation score of the author(s).
We disprove citation pushing. Including superfluous or irrelevant references to boost another author or authors citation record is unethical and where identified may result in removal of such work from our databases and banning of involved authors in accordance with the guidelines set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics.
We encourage our authors to cite the relevant scholarship published previously to strongly establish their arguments. Sometimes, peer-reviewers may also refer authors to work the reviewer believes can further develop and improve ideas in papers under review. This should not be conveyed in a coercive way and cannot be a condition of acceptance or without academic justification.
We value both author freedom and editorial independence. If you believe that you are pressured to include a particular reference in your work, please contact us on email@example.com.
All authors are required to provide proof of consent for studies about named organisations or people before submitting their work.
Our editors may request removal or change of the text, or reject the work, if unsubstantiated or emotive statements are made about organisations or people in a submission.
Although we encourage constructive criticism, malicious content is not allowed. Any defamatory and/or libellous statements may result in retraction of the work and /or withdrawal of the online version(s).
All the work submitted must be your own work and expressed in your own words. We take plagiarism very seriously. There are various forms plagiarism can take and all are strictly not allowed.
Plagiarism could be in the form of an exact copy of another person’s work without acknowledgement, references or use of quotation marks; or it can be improper paraphrasing without appropriate attribution; or using a figure, table or paragraph without acknowledgement, references or the use of quotation marks. Authors are responsible to obtain the necessary permissions from the copyright holder. Similarly, recycling previous work without leading to different arguments or relating to new data is not allowed for our authors. Previously published work must be clearly referenced.
Plagiarism allegations are treated carefully and they may have serious effect on authors career. We listen to all parties (relevant to copyrights) involved in such allegations before we decide on a course of action. All such allegations are handled in accordance with the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
Similarly, we do not allow any other unethical behaviour including fabrication of data, image manipulation to mislead, and dual publications.
Conflicts of interest and grievances
Everybody involved in the publication process, authors, reviewers and editors alike has a duty to be vigilant and report possible conflicts of interest. When submitting work, authors must declare anything that may have influenced your work and/or could influence the review process or the publication of the work.
Such conflicts may arise from, for example, a financial or personal interest in the outcomes of the research, undisclosed support for the research, a prior relationship between author and editor.
When submitting work, a note providing the background to any financial support for the research from third parties and any other possible conflict of interest must be declared.
Similarly, if authors believe a concerned editor or reviewer might have a conflict of interest, the publisher should be informed. In addressing such issues, we will follow the COPE guidelines.
If your work has been declined and you believe there are grounds to appeal the decision, such as new evidence or a reviewer’s misunderstanding of your article, you may appeal such decision by writing to the Editor or the Publisher on firstname.lastname@example.org. We aim to consider such complaints and resolve within two months. This decisions are final and cannot be appealed.
Oxbridge Publishing house Ltd treats all misconduct fairly, objectively, and carefully. Ethical issues are resolved by collecting the full accounts within reason and involved parties are informed of the decision. We follow the Committee on Publication Ethics in determining the processes. We reserve the right to withdraw and rescind any acceptance should a case of ethical misconduct be discovered prior to publication.
Changes in our Publishing Ethics Policy
If we make changes to this policy we will detail them on this page. If it is appropriate we may provide you with details by email; we suggest that you regularly visit this page to see any changes or updates to this policy.
This policy was last updated in March 2022.