Publication Guidelines And Ethics
Publication Guidelines And Ethics
The Quarterly Journal of Finance and Accounting (QJFA) is a high-quality, peer-reviewed academic journal that institutes a double-blind peer-review process and ethical publication standards. The main goal of our editorial process is to produce a product that provides significant scientific contributions to the literature. In order to accomplish this, we require that all editors, reviewers, and authors adhere to ethical publication practices that encourage original research and the proper attribution of previous research findings, free from bias and conflicts of interest. Our publication standards ensure the Journal’s positive reputation among the research community and serve to guide the editors, peer reviewers, and authors in meeting their responsibilities of ethical publishing.
Editorial Process and Guidelines
The Editor’s Role and Responsibilities
It is the responsibility of the editorial staff to ensure that the publication process follows ethical practices. The peer-review process is a double-blind process. It is the Editor’s responsibility to ensure that submitting authors do not know the identities of the reviewers of their respective manuscripts. Likewise, Editors will not supply reviewers of manuscripts with the identities or affiliations of the submitting author(s). All identifying information should be stripped from manuscripts during the process of placing them under peer review, and identifying information should be removed from all reviewer comments when supplying peer feedback to submitting authors.
The editorial staff may not attempt to influence the reviewer opinion of an article submitted for peer review.
The reviewer comments are used by the Editor in order to evaluate the originality and contribution of the research. Following peer-review, the editorial staff selects which articles are accepted for publication. The Editor’s publication decisions may, however, also be guided by the Journal’s Editorial Board.
All manuscripts submitted to JIEBF are evaluated based solely on the their respective quality and contribution to the body of scholarly research in the given field. At no time will the Editor give any consideration to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the submitting author(s).
Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest
Editors have a responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscripts under consideration for publication. No member of the editorial staff shall at any time discuss any information regarding a submitted article to any person(s), other than the corresponding author, potential reviewers, reviewers, editorial advisors, or the Publisher.
Editors also have a responsibility to ensure the publication process is free of conflicts of interest. No member of the editorial staff shall use any materials disclosed in the process of article submission for use in his or her own research, without the express written permission of the submitting author(s). This includes any results discussed in a submitted manuscript, in whole or in part, while the manuscript is under consideration for publication in the Journal.
Review Process and Guidelines
The Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers
All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review. All identifying information will be removed from submitted papers before they are released to be reviewed by the reviewer. In addition, the submitting author(s) will not receive information regarding the identity of his or her reviewers. Any correspondence and comments from the reviewers will be made anonymous by the Editor before being passed on to the submitting author(s). The identities of the reviewers are only known to the editorial staff, and at no point is this information disclosed to the authors.
The process of peer review is important, as it helps in guiding editorial decisions and improves the quality of the submitted and selected papers. Reviewers are expected to have an expert knowledge in the subject matter presented in the submitted manuscript, and they should be able to adequately evaluate the submitted manuscript for originality, technique, style, and context. Additionally, as a matter of fairness to submitting authors, reviewers should be prepared to offer a timely review with feedback that is appropriate, detailed, and supported. Selected reviewers who feel unable or unqualified to properly evaluate an assigned manuscript, or who feel that he or she cannot provide a timely review of the assigned manuscript should contact the editors in order to excuse him or herself from the review process.
Additionally, when providing feedback to submitting author(s), reviews should be objective, and the views expressed about the manuscript by reviewers should be stated clearly and with appropriate supporting evidence/references. Reviewers are not to submit personal criticism of the author(s).
Ethical Publication Practices (Plagiarism)
The reviewer’s detailed examination of the submitted manuscript is an important part of maintaining the ethical integrity of the publication process. Authors are required to provide proper citation and references to any statements or findings in the manuscript that have been previously published in another publication. Related works that have been published elsewhere, but which are not mentioned by the author(s) in the submitted manuscript should be identified and brought to the attention of the authors for inclusion in the research. In addition, in the event that a reviewer identifies in a submitted manuscript (or a portion thereof) an unreferenced statement, empirical finding, or other work, that bears substantial resemblance to another published or unpublished work, he or she should contact the Editor, as this constitutes plagiarism.
Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality with regards to information contained in submitted manuscripts and are also required to remain free of conflicts of interest. Information, ideas, and results obtained by reviewers in the scope of the peer review process should be kept confidential and should at no time be disclosed or discussed with any other party without permission from the Editor. In addition, any manuscript-related materials received by reviewers during the scope of peer review should not be used by the reviewer in his or her own work, or for any other personal gain.
Additionally, other conflicts of interest arising from an assigned manuscript should also be brought to the attention of the editorial staff. A conflict of interest may include, but is not limited to: a competitive or collaborative relationship with any author; a conflict with a company or institution affiliated with the research, etc. In the event that a reviewer identifies a conflict of interest, he or she should notify the Editor and recuse him or herself from reviewing the manuscript.
Submissions should be the author’s original work, and it is the duty of the author to accurately describe the work performed as well as its significance and contribution to the literature. For empirical research, the author is also required to accurately represent the empirical results in the paper. In addition, the manuscript should contain enough detail and references such that the work may be reasonably replicated by another author. The submission of inaccurate or misleading statements in a manuscript is unacceptable.
When submitting a manuscript containing empirical results, the authors should be prepared to furnish the raw data used in conducting the analysis for editorial review. The sources of public data sources should be provided. Additionally, authors should retain all data used in an empirical analysis for a period of time after publication.
All publications submitted to the Journal go through a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers with expertise in the submission’s field of study will be selected, but neither the author(s) nor the reviewer will be given information by the Editor regarding the other’s identity or affiliation. Reviewer feedback will be supplied to the submitting authors upon completion of the review, however no identifying information will be provided.
Plagiarism and Proper Publishing Practices
All works submitted to the journal are expected to be original, previously unpublished works that contribute to the literature in the field. Manuscripts should also not be under simultaneous review or consideration for another publication. Additionally, all ideas presented in a manuscript that are not the author’s original work must be properly cited and referenced. Works from other authors that are influential in the motivation of the submitted work should be acknowledged and referenced in the manuscript. Failure to present original work, or the failure to properly attribute ideas used in a manuscript to the original authors constitutes plagiarism. Plagiarism sanctions will be considered for those violating the plagiarism guidelines.
Submitted works should not have been published or concurrently under review or consideration to be published in another publication. Manuscripts that are found to comprise essentially the same research that have been submitted/published elsewhere are subject to sanctions under these guidelines. In the event that an author’s previous work is used as a basis for a separate study, it is the author’s responsibility to cite the previous work and specifically discuss how the submitted research contributes to the literature in a way that significantly extends the original work. Submitting duplicate research to more than one journal concurrently is considered an unethical publication practice. The use of separate publications to disseminate results that are essentially identical is also considered unethical, and such practices are subject to sanctions under these guidelines.
References and citations contained in a submitted manuscript should be limited to the amount and scope necessary to properly attribute the work of others and motivate the topic at hand. Authors should refrain from manipulating citations with the intention of increasing the citations of a specific author or those from a particular publication. Manuscripts violating this provision may be subject to sanctions under these guidelines.
Co-Authors, Corresponding Authors and Conflicts of Interest
Submitting authors are expected to properly attribute their original work. Each person who has contributed significantly to the conceptualization, design, execution, and interpretative analysis included in a submitted paper should be listed as an author of the paper. Others contributing in a less substantive way to the completion of the submitted works should be listed as contributors or in an acknowledgment. All persons making a significant scientific contribution to the submitted research should be listed as a co-author. In addition, each co-author should each approve the research claims made in the manuscript. The responsibility to list all appropriate authors includes the acknowledgment of students and others making a contribution.
The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the journal as well as all other co-authors with regards to submission and publication of the manuscript. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that all appropriate authors are listed as such. In addition, the corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have read the submission, agree with the assertions therein, and approve of its submission for publication.
In addition to properly attributing the manuscript to all authors who have made a significant contribution, all funding sources for a specific submitted manuscript should be disclosed after the conclusion of the paper, but before the references. In addition, any other potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, which may be seen to potentially influence the findings of the research should also be disclosed. Such conflicts include personal affiliations with collaborating or competitive authors, institutions, companies, government agencies, etc.
Falsification and Errors/Omissions
Authors are required to represent all findings in a way that is truthful and accurate in the context of the submitted papers. Submitted papers that are found to purposefully contain falsified data or other results, tables, figures, images, or related interpretations are subject to sanctions under these guidelines.
In addition, it is the responsibility of the author to report any significant factual errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in the research that may be discovered after publication. The submitting author should contact the Editor in order that the submission may be withdrawn or corrected.
Authors will be asked to complete a “Copyright Transfer Form” upon acceptance of an article. The corresponding author will receive an email from the journal publisher confirming receipt of the manuscript together with a “copyright Transfer Form”. It is corresponding authors responsibility to correctly complete the form and get signatures from all the authors listed on the manuscript. The authors reserve all proprietary right other than copyright, such as patent rights.
Sanctions may be applied in the event of receipt of a manuscript found to violate the ethical standards set forth by these guidelines. The following sanctions may be imposed on such manuscripts:
- Rejection of the manuscript.
- Rejection of other manuscripts under submission to the Journal by any co-author.
- Prohibition of all future submissions from any co-author for a minimum of two years.
- Prohibition of future submissions from any co-author and any other co-author(s) for a minimum of two years.
- Prohibition the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of the Journal.
The Journal reserves the right to impose sanctions beyond those outlined in the case of a particularly egregious violation of the publication guidelines set forth.