Ethics, Integrity & Retraction Policy

Ethics, Integrity & Retraction Policy

The Journal of Agribusiness and Social Sciences (JASS) is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. This policy aligns with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and international best practices to ensure research integrity, transparency, and accountability. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to adhere to these ethical principles throughout the publication process.

1. Authorship & Contribution Policy

  • Authorship credit is limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research, manuscript preparation, drafting, or revision.
  • All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript before submission.
  • Supervisors, co-supervisors, project co-PIs, or institutional heads do not qualify for authorship by default unless they have made a significant intellectual contribution to the work.
  • The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring compliance with the journal's authorship requirements and must provide a statement of individual contributions at the end of the article.

2. Initial Screening & Peer Review Policy

  • Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo preliminary screening for journal scope, formatting, academic quality, and plagiarism.
  • Manuscripts passing the initial screening are subjected to double-blind peer review by at least two independent reviewers.
  • Authors may suggest potential reviewers, but the editorial team retains final authority for reviewer selection to ensure an independent and unbiased review process.
  • Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, declare any conflicts of interest, and provide an objective, fair, constructive, and timely assessment of the manuscript.

3. Research Integrity & Misconduct Policy

JASS strictly prohibits:

  • Plagiarism (including self-plagiarism): Manuscripts may be screened using Turnitin or an equivalent similarity-detection system.
  • Data fabrication or falsification: Inventing, altering, misreporting, or manipulating research data, results, or findings.
  • Redundant or duplicate publication: Submitting substantially the same research to multiple journals or republishing previously published work without appropriate justification and disclosure.
  • Gift or ghost authorship: Including individuals who have not made a qualifying contribution or excluding individuals who have made substantial contributions.
  • Unethical research practices: Failing to obtain required ethical approval, informed consent, or other necessary permissions for research involving human participants, animals, personal data, or other sensitive research materials.

Depending on the nature and severity of the violation, misconduct may result in manuscript rejection, withdrawal, institutional notification, restrictions on future submissions, or retraction of published articles.

4. Retraction, Corrections & Erratum Policy

  • Corrections: Minor errors that do not materially affect the research findings or conclusions may be corrected through an appropriate correction notice, erratum, or corrigendum.
  • Retractions: Published articles may be retracted when serious ethical or scholarly breaches, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or significant research misconduct, are established.
  • Expressions of Concern: Where a substantial concern has been raised but an investigation has not yet been completed, JASS may publish an Expression of Concern while the matter is being investigated.

Corrections, retractions, and Expressions of Concern will follow applicable COPE guidance and will be appropriately linked to the original publication.

5. Conflicts of Interest (COI) Policy

  • Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, professional, or personal conflicts of interest that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their research or its interpretation.
  • Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists, including relevant personal, professional, financial, or recent collaborative relationships with the authors.
  • Editors will not handle submissions where a significant conflict of interest exists and may delegate editorial responsibility to another qualified editorial member.

6. Ethical Oversight & Human/Animal Research Policy

  • Studies involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki where relevant, and must provide details of the appropriate ethical approval or review.
  • Research involving animals must comply with applicable institutional, national, and internationally recognized ethical standards and guidelines.
  • Authors must obtain informed consent from human participants where required, particularly for research involving personal information, identifiable data, photographs, interviews, or case reports.
  • Authors are responsible for ensuring that research involving human participants, animals, personal data, or other sensitive information has received all necessary approvals and permissions before submission.

7. Responsibilities of Authors, Reviewers & Editors

Authors

  • Ensure the originality, integrity, and accuracy of their work.
  • Provide appropriate citations and acknowledge all sources.
  • Obtain permission to reproduce previously published figures, tables, images, or other copyrighted material where required.
  • Maintain relevant raw data and research records for at least five years and provide them for verification when reasonably requested, subject to ethical, legal, privacy, and confidentiality requirements.

Reviewers

  • Maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and associated information.
  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive, evidence-based feedback.
  • Disclose any conflicts of interest and decline review assignments where a conflict exists.
  • Avoid using unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

Editors

  • Ensure a fair, transparent, consistent, and confidential peer-review process.
  • Handle ethical complaints and allegations of misconduct in accordance with applicable COPE guidance and procedures.
  • Take appropriate corrective action, including corrections, Expressions of Concern, or retractions, where warranted.
  • Protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and ensure that editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit and journal policy.

8. Reporting Misconduct & Appeals Process

  • Allegations of ethical breaches, including plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, or other forms of research misconduct, may be reported to the Editor-in-Chief or Managing Editor.
  • Where necessary, JASS may establish or designate a Fact-Finding Committee (FFC) to examine allegations and provide recommendations.
  • Authors have the right to appeal an editorial decision by submitting a formal, reasoned justification within two weeks of notification of the decision. Appeals will be considered by the appropriate editorial authority and will be handled independently of the original decision where practicable.

For detailed ethical and publishing guidance, authors, reviewers, and editors are encouraged to consult: