Publication Ethics

Researchium is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and research integrity across all journals.

gavel COPE-Aligned Principles verified Ethical Publishing shield Research Integrity visibility Transparent Editorial Practices

handshake Our Ethics Commitment

Researchium coordinates six academic journals under the highest benchmarks of accountability. We aim to ensure scientific development by building transparent pipelines from initial review to citation registration.

health_and_safety

Integrity

Upholding strict honesty across datasets, formulations, and bibliographic records.

visibility

Transparency

Fully declaring review metrics, processing costs, and funding channels.

assignment_ind

Accountability

Adhering to international archiving ethics and COPE corrective actions.

balance

Fairness

Evaluating all manuscripts on intellectual merit without background biases.

query_stats

Scientific Rigor

Ensuring peer evaluations are conducted by matching subject-experts.

verified_user

Ethical Responsibility

Enforcing strict consent and ethical committee approval criteria.

person Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting to Researchium must confirm and uphold the following criteria to ensure publication reliability and indexability:

check_circle

Originality

Confirming the work is original and does not replicate existing research.

check_circle

Accurate Reporting

Representing experimental data exactly without editing, selective filtration, or deletion.

check_circle

Proper Citations

Referencing and citing all research and materials used in the investigation.

check_circle

Data Integrity

Providing raw data/computational datasets if requested during review.

check_circle

Ethical Approvals

Disclosing institutional ethics approvals where human or animal subjects are involved.

check_circle

Conflict Disclosures

Declaring all direct or indirect funding or partnerships related to the research.

check_circle

Authorship Transparency

Including only researchers who made significant design, empirical, or writing contributions.

rate_review Responsibilities of Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a critical role in preserving publication standards. Reviewers are expected to adhere to the following principles:

lock

Confidentiality

Treating all manuscripts as protected, confidential material.

balance

Objectivity

Assessing papers on scientific merit alone.

edit_note

Feedback

Supplying supportive, clear explanations.

schedule

Timeliness

Completing reviews within the requested 21 days.

warning

Disclosure

Declaring conflict of interest immediately.

gavel Responsibilities of Editors

Editors supervise the scientific direction of Researchium journals and hold responsibility for maintaining ethical rigor throughout the peer review pipeline.

1

Fair Evaluation & Non-Bias

Evaluate submissions based solely on academic and scientific merit, without regard to author gender, race, nationality, or institutional affiliation.

2

Editorial Independence

Maintain complete autonomy over decisions. Commercial concerns, publisher pressures, or external bodies do not influence manuscript acceptance.

3

Confidential Handling

Protect author privacy. Do not disclose manuscript metadata, files, or reviewer identities to anyone outside the active review pipeline.

4

Ethical Oversight

Actively investigate potential misconduct, plagiarism flags, or conflict queries under COPE guidance rules.

5

Publication Decisions

Reconcile expert recommendations to make final decisions on manuscript publication, corrections, or retractions.

plagiarism Plagiarism Policy

Researchium maintains a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism across all disciplines. All manuscripts undergo screening via similarity detection engines.

report Prohibited Plagiarism Actions

Direct Plagiarism: Copying text block-by-block from another work without citations or quotation marks.
Self-Plagiarism (Text Recycling): Re-using large segments of your own previously published findings without attribution or context.
Mosaic Plagiarism (Paraphrasing): Copying sentences from multiple sources and replacing a few words without proper citations.
Improper Attribution: Failing to cite source ideas, data tables, or diagrams utilized in the study.

Potential Corrective Actions:

Immediate Rejection
Correction Request
Formal Retraction
Publication Ban

warning Data Fabrication & Falsification

Data integrity is the bedrock of scientific literature. Researchium classifies data manipulation as a major breach of publication ethics.

error Misconduct Definitions

Data Fabrication: Making up or inventively generating datasets, graphs, values, or experimental outcomes that never took place.
Data Falsification: Altering, manipulating, or omitting actual data values, parameters, or figure components to present a biased outcome.
--- Outcomes ---
Confirmed instances of fabrication will result in immediate rejection, institutional investigation requests, and retraction notices if already published.

groups Authorship Policy

We follow strict authorship principles to assure credit is allocated fairly to contributing researchers.

Required Contributions

  • Substantial involvement in the conception, design, or data collection.
  • Involvement in parsing, analyzing, or interpreting results.
  • Drafting or critical revision of intellectual content.
  • Final approval of the version to be published.

Unacceptable Practices

  • Ghost Authorship: Omitting contributors who made significant writing or intellectual contributions.
  • Gift/Guest Authorship: Including co-authors who did not contribute directly to the study (e.g. senior supervisors without active involvement).
  • Purchased Authorship: Trading or buying co-authorship positions.

policy Conflict of Interest

All relationships that could bias the evaluation of a manuscript must be declared. Declare the following concerns where applicable:

payments

Financial Interests

Employment, stock holdings, patents, honoraria, or consultancies.

domain

Institutional

Affiliations or funding links with organizations involved in research topics.

group

Personal Links

Family relationships or academic competitor links between author and reviewer.

account_balance_wallet

Funding Influence

Direct funding or research grants supporting the study.

diversity_3 Human & Animal Research

Research involving living subjects must declare and prove adherence to international ethical guidelines:

patient_list

Human Subject Protections

Confirm that studies align with the Declaration of Helsinki. Supply IRB approval documentation and verify informed consent was obtained in writing from all participants.

pets

Animal Welfare compliance

Verify that animal research complies with local, national, and international guidelines (e.g. ARRIVE guidelines). Institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) authorization must be declared.

smart_toy AI & Generative AI Policy

Researchium supports the responsible adoption of artificial intelligence tools under clear guidelines:

info AI Support Limitations

Allowed Assistance: Grammar check tools, translation tools, and spell checkers are permitted to improve clarity.
Authorship Prohibited: AI tools cannot be listed as authors. They cannot review peer comments or take responsibility for findings.
Accountability: The human authors are fully responsible for checking AI references, mathematical data, and literature evaluations.

forum Complaints & Appeals

Authors who disagree with editorial decisions or suspect misconduct can log formal appeals under this timeline:

1. Submit Complaint
2. Initial Screen
3. Editorial Review
4. Final Decision
5. Resolution Logged

rule_folder Corrections & Retractions

To preserve the reliability of scholarly citations, Researchium issues corrections or retractions under COPE protocols:

Correction Notice

Issued for minor, honest scientific errors that do not affect the conclusions of the paper.

Expression of Concern

Published when investigations into potential scientific misconduct are ongoing.

Formal Retraction

Published if significant scientific error, plagiarism, or fabricated data invalidate findings.

Article Removal

Rarely executed. Used only for legal injunctions or severe privacy violations.

query_builder Ethics Investigation Process

When a potential ethical breach or misconduct report is received, the editorial board triggers this structured investigation process:

1. Report Received
2. Initial Check
3. Evidence Review
4. Author Response
5. Board Decision
6. Final Action

help_center Frequently Asked Questions

Review common queries regarding academic publishing ethics, authorship disputes, retractions, and complaint processes.

What happens if plagiarism is detected?

If plagiarism is flagged during screening, the paper is immediately rejected. If it is detected post-publication, a formal investigation under COPE guidelines is initiated which can lead to a formal Retraction Notice.

Can an article be retracted?

Yes. If investigations identify data fabrication, falsified calculations, ethical violations, or duplicate publishing, the paper will be retracted. A Retraction Notice is published and permanently linked to the article DOI.

How are complaints and appeals handled?

Appeals are routed through a structured process. An editorial committee evaluates the case, reviews reviewer comments, invites the author to submit explanations, and issues a final, non-negotiable ruling.

Can AI tools be listed as co-authors?

No. Generative AI tools cannot be listed as co-authors under any circumstances because they cannot accept legal responsibility or sign authorship agreements. AI tool usage in writing must be declared in the Acknowledgements.

Can I submit a paper that has been submitted elsewhere?

No. Duplicate submission is a major ethical breach. Manuscripts must not be under review at another journal while being evaluated by Researchium.

What should I do if I suspect an authorship dispute?

Authorship disputes must be settled by the researchers and their institutional boards. The editorial office will pause the evaluation of the manuscript until a signed agreement is submitted by all involved authors.

Do you accept anonymous complaints?

We accept anonymous alerts of misconduct if they supply clear, verifiable evidence or statistical flags (e.g. image manipulation proofs, duplicate text references). Vague allegations without proof will not trigger investigations.

What is the role of institutional review boards (IRB)?

For studies involving human or animal subjects, IRB approval guarantees the study met institutional safety and ethical parameters. Re-use of human samples requires formal participant consent.

What are the consequences of scientific misconduct?

Misconduct leads to immediate rejection, retraction of published papers, institutional alerts, and potential bans on submitting future manuscripts to all Researchium journals.

Are reviewers anonymous?

Yes. Researchium uses a double-blind peer-review system. Reviewer identities are kept confidential to ensure unbiased evaluations.

How do you check for image manipulation?

Editors screen uploaded micrographs, blots, and graphs using specialized checking tools to flag splicing, duplication, or contrast alterations.

Who handles conflict of interest disputes?

Editorial boards evaluate conflict declarations. Reviewers with conflicts are replaced, and editors with conflicts recuse themselves from decisions.

What is self-plagiarism?

Self-plagiarism is the re-use of text or findings from your own previously published papers without citation. It violates original content standards.

Is data sharing mandatory?

Researchium strongly encourages authors to deposit datasets in open public repositories (e.g. Figshare, Zenodo) to facilitate transparency and scientific verification.

How do I submit an ethics appeal?

Ethics appeals must be sent in writing to the editorial office, detailing scientific rebuttals and any supporting evidence.

Committed to Ethical Research Publishing

Researchium promotes transparency, integrity and responsible scholarly communication across all disciplines.

verified Ethical Publishing
gavel Editorial Independence
shield Research Integrity
lock_open Transparency