Publication Ethics

1. Peer Review Policy

This journal adopts double‑blind peer‑review for all submitted manuscripts.

  • Neither reviewers know authors’ identities, nor authors know reviewers’ identities throughout the evaluation process.
  • Manuscripts are assessed based on academic merit, originality, thematic relevance and scholarly value, free from discrimination regarding author nationality, institutional affiliation, academic rank or personal background.
  • At least two independent qualified peer reviewers will evaluate each eligible submission. Reviewers shall deliver objective, constructive comments within the agreed timeline.
  • Review comments remain confidential and serve solely for editorial decision‑making. Reviewers must recuse themselves when conflicts of interest exist.
  • Returning a manuscript for revision does not guarantee final acceptance. The Editor‑in‑Chief makes the final publication decision based on reviewer reports and editorial assessmentIGI Global....
  • All peer‑review procedures comply with COPE peer‑review ethics requirements.

2. Publication Ethics

Arts and Humanities Perspectives and Digital and Media Perspectives maintain high‑level publication ethics and academic integrity for all manuscripts submitted by authors worldwide. This set of policies applies to authors, editors, peer reviewers and the publisher. All stakeholders must abide by ethical standards to safeguard the trust, originality and quality of international scholarly publishing. Core ethical principles include: originality of work, proper attribution of sources, valid authorship declaration, transparent conflict‑of‑interest disclosure, prohibition of simultaneous duplicate submission, confidentiality of unpublished review materials, fair peer review, and proper disposal of publication misconduct. Suspected ethical violations will trigger formal investigation according to COPE guidelines, regardless whether the paper is under review or already published.

3. Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism, self‑plagiarism, unmarked text recycling / redundant publication are strictly prohibited.

  • Definition: Plagiarism means using others’ ideas, texts, images, data or materials (published or unpublished) without adequate citation and attribution. Self‑plagiarism refers to large‑scale reuse of authors’ own previously published content without clear statement and proper reference.
  • Pre‑review screening: Every submitted manuscript will go through textual‑similarity detection before entering peer review.
  • Consequences for undetected submission: Manuscripts showing significant uncredited copying will be rejected.
  • Post‑publication discovery: If plagiarism is confirmed after online publication, the journal will initiate corrective measures including correction, Expression of Concern or formal article retraction; relevant institutions of the involved authors may receive formal notification. Honest error and differences of academic interpretation are not treated as plagiarism.

4. Retraction & Correction Policy

The journal maintains the accuracy and credibility of the permanent scholarly record following COPE retraction‑correction guidelinesmembers.pu....

Correction

Minor typographical, formatting or factual mistakes that do not alter core research conclusions will be published as a formal Correction notice linked permanently to the original article. Corrections are open‑access and indexed together with the original paper.

Expression of Concern

When credible concerns are raised about a published article while conclusive evidence for misconduct remains pending, the editorial team may issue an Expression of Concern to alert readers, pending further institutional or editorial investigation.

Retraction

A full retraction notice will be issued when:

  1. Reliable evidence proves data fabrication / falsification, serious plagiarism or redundant publication without disclosure;
  2. Major errors invalidate the core findings of the article;
  3. Severe ethical violations of research or publishing rules are verified.

Retraction notices are open‑access, clearly labelled, permanently linked to the retracted article, and state objective reasons for retraction. Retraction will proceed even if authors cannot be contacted or disagree with the decisionCOPE: Comm....

5. Conflict of Interest Policy

All parties (authors, editors, reviewers) must disclose relevant conflicts of interest (COI) that may bias judgement on manuscripts.

  • For Authors: Authors must declare financial relationships, institutional connections, professional or personal interests potentially influencing research design, data interpretation or results discussion. All funding sources shall be explicitly written in manuscript acknowledgements. If no conflict exists, authors shall make a “no conflict of interest” statement. Undisclosed major conflicts may lead to rejection or post‑publication corrective actions.
  • For Reviewers: Reviewers must declare any COI related to manuscript topics, project funding or authors; reviewers with conflicts must decline the review invitation.
  • For Editors: Editors shall recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where personal or institutional conflicts exist and assign alternative editorial staff. Conflict‑of‑interest disclosures may be published alongside accepted articles for transparency.

6. Authorship Policy

Authorship shall be granted only to persons who have made substantial intellectual contributions to manuscript conception, research design, data collection, writing drafting or critical intellectual revision of content.

  • Guest authorship, honorary authorship and ghost authorship are strictly forbidden. Individuals making minor assistance only (e.g. general administrative support, simple data collection without intellectual input) should be thanked in acknowledgements instead of being listed as co‑authors.
  • All co‑authors must read, approve the final manuscript version and consent to submission. Corresponding author bears responsibility to verify the complete author list before submission.
  • Authorship disputes will be investigated by the editorial office. Until authors reach consensus supported by evidence, the manuscript process may be suspended.

7. Research Integrity

Research integrity requires honesty, transparency and accountability throughout research and publication workflow. Prohibited research‑misconduct behaviours include:

  1. Fabrication: inventing non‑existent data, materials or experimental observations;
  2. Falsification: manipulating, modifying or selectively omitting data, images or source records to distort research outcomes;
  3. Plagiarism and improper text reuse;
  4. Undisclosed duplicate / simultaneous submission;
  5. Misrepresentation of authorship;
  6. Concealment of critical conflicts of interest.

Genuine unintentional mistakes and legitimate academic disagreements do not constitute research misconduct. When misconduct allegations are received, editors may request raw research materials, correspondence and supporting evidence for formal investigation. Confirmed misconduct may trigger rejection, retraction and notification to authors’ affiliated institutions.

8. Responsibilities of Authors, Editors, Reviewers

8.1 Responsibilities of Authors

  1. Submit original work; cite all borrowed ideas, texts and materials properly; avoid plagiarism and self‑plagiarism.
  2. Comply with valid authorship criteria; obtain all co‑authors’ approval for submission.
  3. Fully declare conflicts of interest and funding sources.
  4. Do not submit the identical manuscript simultaneously to multiple journals. Disclose conference presentation history or preprint versions upon submission.
  5. Upon acceptance, articles are published under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Authors retain copyright of their work; readers are granted rights to share, distribute and reuse content with proper attribution.

8.2 Responsibilities of Editors

Editors safeguard journal academic quality. Evaluate manuscripts purely on scholarly value without identity‑based bias. Manage double‑blind peer‑review fairly, protect anonymity of authors and reviewers. Handle ethical complaints promptly and confidentially. Editors may reject manuscripts or take post‑publication corrective actions when serious ethical misconduct is confirmed.

8.3 Responsibilities of Reviewers

Treat assigned manuscripts as strictly confidential documents; shall not quote, circulate or reuse unpublished manuscript content without formal permission. Deliver objective, constructive and timely reviews. Disclose conflicts of interest and opt out when conflicts occur. Identify potential plagiarism, data manipulation and ethical risks in manuscripts.

9. Handling Misconduct & Complaints

Allegations covering plagiarism, data falsification, improper authorship, hidden conflicts‑of‑interest, reviewer or editorial misconduct will undergo systematic editorial investigation following COPE standards. The editorial team can request raw research records, email correspondence and supplementary evidence from involved parties. Verified misconduct may result in:

  • Rejection of ongoing submission;
  • Publication of Correction / Expression of Concern / Retraction notice;
  • Formal written notification to authors’ academic institutions.

Any reader, reviewer or author may submit ethical‑concern complaints to the editorial office. All complaints are treated confidentially and will receive formal follow‑up.

10. Archiving, Open‑Access & Publication Charges

  • Digital Archiving: All accepted articles are deposited into LOCKSS and CLOCKSS permanent digital archive systems to guarantee long‑term preservation of scholarly content.
  • Open‑Access Statement: Both journals are fully open‑access. An Article Processing Charge (APC) of 2500 US dollars is applicable upon manuscript acceptance. After online publication, articles are freely readable and downloadable for global audiences immediately.