The Journal of Innovative Vocational Education and Technology (JIVET) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all necessary steps to prevent publication misconduct. Our publication ethics policy is based on the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

1. Fair Play and Editorial Independence
   • Editorial decisions are based solely on the academic merit, relevance, and quality of manuscripts.
   • Editors evaluate manuscripts without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
   • Editorial decisions remain independent from commercial or institutional interests.

Confidentiality

• Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
• Unpublished materials in submitted manuscripts must not be used by editors or reviewers in their own research without the express written consent of the author.

 

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
  • Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.
  • Editors must require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests.

 

Editorial Process Integrity

• Editors ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process.
• Editors should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints are presented concerning a submitted or published manuscript.
• Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct or if an allegation of misconduct is brought to them.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
   • Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and helps authors improve their manuscripts through the editorial communication process.

Promptness and Efficiency

• Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or cannot provide a prompt review should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

 

• Confidentiality
  • Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
  • Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript in their own research without the express written consent of the author.

 

Standards of Objectivity

• Reviews should be conducted objectively with clear and supportive arguments.
• Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

 

• Acknowledgement of Sources
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  • Reviewers should alert the editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

• Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

1. Originality and Plagiarism
   • Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and properly acknowledge the work of others.
   • All manuscripts are subjected to plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 20% will be returned to authors for revision before consideration.
   • Self-plagiarism (text recycling) is subject to the same scrutiny as other forms of plagiarism.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

• Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.
• Publishing the same research in more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior.
• Previously published work should not be submitted for consideration.

Authorship of the Manuscript

• Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
• All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
• The corresponding author ensures that all contributing co-authors are included and no inappropriate co-authors are included.
• All authors have approved the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission.

Data Access and Retention

• Authors should provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review upon request.
• Authors should retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

 

• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
  • Authors must disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

 

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

• Authors are obliged to promptly notify the journal editor if they discover a significant error in their published work and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Reporting Standards

• Authors reporting experimental studies should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance.
• Data should be represented accurately in the manuscript.
• Sufficient detail and references should be provided to permit others to replicate the work.

Human and Animal Rights

• All studies involving human participants must include statements regarding ethical approval and informed consent.
• Studies involving animal subjects must include statements regarding compliance with relevant guidelines for animal welfare.

Procedures for Dealing with Unethical Behavior

1. Identification of Unethical Behavior

   Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified at any time during the submission, review, or publication process.

Anyone informing the editor about suspected misconduct must provide sufficient evidence.

Investigation

• The editor will conduct an initial investigation, seeking advice from the editorial board as necessary.
• Evidence should be gathered while avoiding spreading allegations beyond those who need to know.

Minor Misconduct

• Cases of minor misconduct may be handled between the editor and author without the need for consultations with the editorial board.

Serious Misconduct

• Serious misconduct might require notification of the author's institutional authorities.
• Decisions regarding whether to involve the institution should be made by the editor and the editorial board.

Outcomes

• Depending on the severity of misconduct, outcomes may include:
  • Informing the author or reviewer of the misunderstanding or breach of publication ethics
  • Formal letter to the perpetrator
  • Publication of formal notice of misconduct
  • Formal retraction or withdrawal of publication
  • Reporting the case to the perpetrator's institution
  • Imposing a ban on submissions from the individual for a defined period

By submitting to JIVET, all authors acknowledge that they have read and agree to comply with these publication ethics guidelines. JIVET reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with these ethical standards.