Publication Ethics

Forefront in Sociology & Political Sciences is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in academic publishing. We adhere to strict ethical guidelines to ensure transparency, fairness, and integrity in the submission, review, and publication processes. Our publication ethics are in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and we expect all authors, editors, and reviewers to comply with these standards.

For Authors

  1. Originality and Plagiarism

    • Authors must ensure that all manuscripts submitted to Forefront in Sociology & Political Sciences are entirely original and not under consideration by any other journal.
    • Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited. Authors should ensure that proper attribution is given to all sources, including direct quotes, paraphrased material, and any other work that informed the research.
    • Text-matching software will be used to detect potential plagiarism. Any submission found to have significant overlap with previously published work without proper citation will be rejected.

  2. Data Integrity

    • Authors must present accurate and truthful data in their manuscripts. Any data manipulation, falsification, or fabrication is considered unethical and will result in immediate rejection of the manuscript.
    • Authors must ensure that all datasets used in their research are available upon request, subject to confidentiality or privacy agreements.

  3. Conflict of Interest

    • Authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that may influence the research or its interpretation. This includes funding sources, affiliations, and any other interests that could be perceived as a conflict of interest.
    • All potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed during the submission process and included in the manuscript under the “Conflicts of Interest” section.

  4. Authorship

    • Only individuals who have significantly contributed to the conception, design, analysis, or interpretation of the research should be listed as authors.
    • All individuals who have contributed to the work should be acknowledged. Authors must ensure that all co-authors agree with the final version of the manuscript and its submission.

  5. Ethical Approval

    • Research involving human participants or animals must have received ethical approval from the relevant research ethics committee or institutional review board. Authors must provide proof of ethical approval when required.
    • Informed consent should be obtained from participants where applicable, and authors must include statements regarding consent in the manuscript.

  6. Redundant and Duplicate Publication

    • Authors must not submit a manuscript that has already been published elsewhere or is under consideration by another journal. Any overlap with previously published work must be clearly disclosed.
    • If authors wish to republish a previously published work, they must obtain permission from the original publisher and provide full citations.

  7. Acknowledgments

    • Authors must appropriately acknowledge all individuals, organizations, or institutions that contributed to the research, funding, or writing process. This includes grants, administrative support, and technical assistance.

For Editors

  1. Editorial Independence

    • The editorial team is responsible for making publication decisions based solely on the quality and relevance of the manuscripts, free from any undue influence or conflicts of interest.
    • Editors should not handle manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest with the author(s). In such cases, the manuscript should be reassigned to another editor.

  2. Confidentiality

    • Editors must treat all manuscripts submitted to the journal as confidential. Manuscripts should not be shared with anyone other than the reviewers and members of the editorial team.
    • Any personal or confidential information gained during the editorial process should not be used for personal gain or disclosed outside of the publication process.

  3. Fairness and Impartiality

    • Editors are responsible for ensuring that all manuscripts are evaluated based on their intellectual content, without regard to the author’s race, gender, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, citizenship, or political philosophy.
    • Manuscript evaluations should be based on the quality, originality, and scientific merit of the work, ensuring that all authors are treated fairly and equally.

  4. Decision-making Process

    • Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair and transparent peer review process. They must make editorial decisions based on the recommendations of reviewers, the quality of the manuscript, and the suitability of the research for the journal.
    • In the case of a conflict between reviewers or a disagreement with a reviewer’s recommendation, editors should make an informed decision and provide clear reasoning.

  5. Corrections and Retractions

    • Editors must act promptly if they become aware of any errors or inaccuracies in a published article. If significant errors are identified, corrections, retractions, or clarifications will be issued in a timely manner.
    • If research misconduct is identified after publication, the journal will issue a formal retraction, and the article will be removed or updated as necessary.

For Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality

    • Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential and not share or discuss the manuscript with anyone outside of the peer review process.
    • Reviewers should not use any information from the manuscript for their own research or personal gain.

  2. Constructive Feedback

    • Reviewers are expected to provide constructive, unbiased, and detailed feedback on the manuscript. Reviews should focus on the quality, methodology, originality, and contribution of the research to the field.
    • Reviewers should avoid making comments on the author’s race, nationality, or personal characteristics that are not related to the academic quality of the work.

  3. Conflicts of Interest

    • Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality in reviewing the manuscript. This includes financial interests, personal relationships, or any other factor that could bias the review.
    • If a reviewer has a conflict of interest, they should recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

  4. Timeliness

    • Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the time frame agreed upon with the editor. If they are unable to meet the deadline, they should notify the editor as soon as possible.
    • Delays in reviews may result in delays in the publication process, so timely feedback is essential for maintaining the integrity and efficiency of the journal.

Ethical Guidelines for Publication

Forefront in Sociology & Political Sciences follows the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). We expect all involved in the editorial and publishing process—authors, editors, and reviewers—to uphold these standards of ethical behavior.

If you believe you have encountered an ethical issue or violation, please contact the editorial team immediately. We will investigate any allegations of misconduct and take appropriate action.