Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Journal of General Education and Humanities (GEHU) 's Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based, in large part, on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The relevant duties and expectations of authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal are below.

Responsibilities of Authors

By submitting a manuscript to General Education and Humanities (GEHU), the author(s) warrant that the manuscript is their own, original work and that it has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. They also deserve that the sources of any ideas and words in the manuscript that are not theirs have been properly attributed through appropriate citations and quotes.

An author should not usually publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in multiple journals or publication venues. Such redundant publication is generally considered to constitute unethical publishing behaviour and, if discovered, may result in a manuscript under consideration being rejected or a published article being retracted.

Authors of manuscripts reporting on original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, accompanied by an objective discussion of its significance. Who should represent underlying data accurately in the manuscript? The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and making fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and may cause rejection or retraction of a manuscript or published article.

When the manuscript reports on commercial software, hardware, or other products, authors must include a declaration at the beginning of the manuscript stating that no conflict of interest exists or describe the nature of any potential conflict. The manuscript should also disclose all sources of financial support for the research.

The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in General Education and Humanities (GEHU), the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. This license allows others to copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work freely and derivative works based upon it under certain specified conditions.

Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

The authors' names should be listed on the article in order of their contribution to the article, and all authors take responsibility for their contributions. Only those individuals who have made a substantive contribution should be listed as authors; those whose contributions are indirect or marginal (e.g., colleagues or supervisors who have reviewed drafts of the work or provided proofreading assistance, and heads of research institutes/centres/labs) should be named in an "Acknowledgments" section at the end of the article, immediately preceding the Reference List. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the article and that all listed co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its publication.

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an article of his/hers that has been published in General Education and Humanities (GEHU), they must promptly notify the editors and cooperate with them to correct the article or retract it as appropriate.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

General Education and Humanities (GEHU) 's reviewers perform work for the journal on a volunteer basis. Given that most of these individuals are in full-time employment, their reviewing activities for General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  must, by necessity, not be their top priority. Reviewers are free to decline invitations to review particular manuscripts at their discretion, for example, if their current employment workload and other commitments make it prohibitive for them to complete a review in a timely fashion and do justice to the task in the available time frame. They should also not accept manuscript review assignments for which they feel unqualified.

Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are generally expected to submit their reviews within one month. They should recuse themselves from the work if it becomes apparent to them at any stage that they do not possess the required expertise to perform the review or that they may have a potential conflict of interest in performing the assessment (e.g., one resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript).

Privileged information or ideas obtained by reviewers through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  Editor.

When conducting their reviews, reviewers are asked to do so as objectively as possible, refraining from engaging in personal criticism of the author(s). They are encouraged to express their views clearly, explaining and justifying all recommendations. They should always attempt to provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their work, even if the manuscript is, in their opinion, not publishable.

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s) and any instances in which proper attribution of sources has not been provided. They should call to the responsible Editor's attention any significant resemblances between a manuscript under consideration and other published articles or papers of which they are aware, as well as any concerns they might have concerning the ethical acceptability of the research reported in the manuscript.

Responsibilities of Editors

The General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  has ultimate responsibility for deciding if a manuscript submitted to General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  should be published and, in doing so, is guided by the journal's policies as determined by the General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editor and other editorial team members, as well as with reviewers, in making publication decisions.

The editors will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). They will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances, the General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  editorial board members, as appropriate. Additionally, the editors will make every effort to ensure the integrity of the blind review process by not revealing the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript to the reviewers of that manuscript and vice versa.

When evaluating a manuscript for publication, in addition to considering standard criteria about the rigour of the manuscript, the quality of its presentation, and its contribution to humanity's stock of knowledge, the editors will also seek evidence that ethical harms have been minimized in the conduct of the reported research. They will question whether the benefits outweigh the disadvantages in the particular study's case. Since General Education and Humanities (GEHU)  welcomes the submission of manuscripts from any country, it is necessary to recognize that laws and regulations regarding research ethics and ethical approval vary worldwide. As such, the editors may need to seek clarification from the author(s) and request that they supply a letter from the relevant institutional ethics committee or board that approved the research.

CORE's Guidelines will guide the editors for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing an expression of concern about, and correcting articles published in General Education and Humanities (GEHU). They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions in line with CORE's advice on Cooperation between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.

Ethical Oversight

In educational sciences and other fields such as medicine, researchers must comply with ethical rules while using human subjects, working on vulnerable populations or handling confidential data. The journal adheres to "Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research", published by the British Educational Research Association (BERA). We encourage authors who will submit their manuscripts to the journal to adopt these ethical guidelines and apply them in their research process.

Subject Consent

The journal follows the guidelines for authors/researchers specifying how they should declare the consent of publication from the study participants. The authors must obtain appropriate permissions to include the participants' personal information or data in the publication and meet all requirements of the laws and regulations concerning the privacy and security of personal information.

It is the responsibility of the authors/researchers to ensure that:

  • Participants or their legal guardian to act on the individual's behalf who appears in any picture, video, or another identifiable form must give their written consent. They should be informed about all conditions to use their data. All written consents retained by the authors must be provided to the publisher on request.
  • Who should not use any data for which written permission is not received in the publication?
  • The written consent should fulfil all requirements of Data Protection and Privacy Laws.
  • Who should not use personal information such as name, address, and date of birth in the publication, so any identifying details should be omitted if they are not crucial to report?

WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects

https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki-ethical-principles-for-medical-research-involving-human-subjects

Preamble

  1. The World Medical Association (WMA) has developed the Declaration of Helsinki as a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data.
  2. The Declaration is intended to be read as a whole, and each of its constituent paragraphs should be applied considering all other relevant sections.
  3. Consistent with the mandate of the WMA, the Declaration is addressed primarily to physicians. The WMA encourages others in medical research involving human subjects to adopt these principles.

General Principles

  1. The Declaration of Geneva of the WMA binds the physician with the words, "The health of my patient will be my first consideration," and the International Code of Medical Ethics declares, "A physician shall act in the patient's best interest when providing medical care."
  2. The physician must promote and safeguard patients' health, well-being and rights, including those involved in medical research. The physician's knowledge and conscience are dedicated to fulfilling this duty.

Medical progress is based on research that ultimately must include studies involving human subjects.

  1. The primary purpose of medical research involving human subjects is to understand diseases' causes, development and effects and improve preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic interventions (methods, procedures and treatments). Even the best-proven interventions must be evaluated continually through research for their safety, effectiveness, efficiency, accessibility and quality.
  2. Medical research is subject to ethical standards that promote and ensure respect for all human subjects and protect their health and rights.
  3. While the primary purpose of medical research is to generate new knowledge, this goal can never precede the rights and interests of individual research subjects.
  4. It is the duty of physicians involved in medical research to protect the life, health, dignity, integrity, right to self-determination, privacy, and confidentiality of the personal information of research subjects. The responsibility for protecting research subjects must always rest with the physician or other health care professionals and never with the research subjects, even though they have given consent.
  5. Physicians must consider the ethical, legal and regulatory norms and standards for research involving human subjects in their own countries and applicable international norms and standards. No national or international ethical, legal or regulatory requirement should reduce or eliminate any of the protections for research subjects outlined in this Declaration.
  6. What should conduct medical research in a manner that minimizes possible harm to the environment?
  7. Medical research involving human subjects must be conducted only by individuals with the appropriate ethics, scientific education, training and qualifications. A study on patients or healthy volunteers requires the supervision of a competent and appropriately qualified physician or other health care professional.
  8. Groups that are underrepresented in medical research should be provided appropriate access to participation in the study.
  9. Physicians who combine medical research with medical care should involve their patients in research only to the extent that this is justified by its potential preventive, diagnostic or therapeutic value and if the physician has good reason to believe that participation in the research study will not adversely affect the health of the patients who serve as research subjects.
  10. Who must ensure appropriate compensation and treatment for subjects harmed due to participating in research?

Risks, Burdens and Benefits

  1. In medical practice and medical research, most interventions involve risks and burdens.
  2. Who may only conduct medical research involving human subjects if the importance of the objective outweighs the risks and burdens to the research subjects?
  3. All medical research involving human subjects must be preceded by careful assessment of predictable risks and burdens to the individuals and groups involved in the study compared to foreseeable benefits to them and other individuals or groups affected by the condition under investigation.
  4. Who must implement measures to minimize the risks. The risks must be continuously monitored, assessed and documented by the researcher.
  5. Physicians may not be involved in a research study involving human subjects unless they are confident that the risks have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed.
  6. When the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or when there is conclusive proof of definitive outcomes, physicians must assess whether to continue, modify or immediately stop the study.

Vulnerable Groups and Individuals

  1. Some groups and individuals are particularly vulnerable and may be more likely to be wronged or incur additional harm.

All vulnerable groups and individuals should receive specifically considered protection.

  1. Medical research with a vulnerable group is only justified if the research is responsive to this group's health needs or priorities and the study cannot be carried out in a non-vulnerable group. In addition, this group should benefit from the knowledge, practices or interventions that result from the research.

Scientific Requirements and Research Protocols

  1. Medical research involving human subjects must conform to generally accepted scientific principles, be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific literature, other relevant sources of information, and adequate laboratory and, as appropriate, animal experimentation. The welfare of animals used for research must be respected.
  2. The design and performance of each research study involving human subjects must be clearly described and justified in a research protocol.

The protocol should contain a statement of the ethical considerations involved and indicate how this Declaration's principles have been addressed. The protocol should include information regarding funding, sponsors, institutional affiliations, potential conflicts of interest, incentives for subjects and information regarding provisions for treating and compensating subjects who are harmed as a consequence of participation in the research study.

In clinical trials, the protocol must also describe appropriate arrangements for post-trial provisions.

Research Ethics Committees

  1. The research protocol must be submitted for consideration, comment, guidance and approval to the concerned research ethics committee before the study begins. This committee must be transparent in its functioning, independent of the researcher, the sponsor and any other undue influence and be duly qualified. It must consider the laws and regulations of the country or countries where the research is to be performed and applicable international norms and standards. Still, these must not be allowed to reduce or eliminate any of the protections for research subjects outlined in this Declaration.

The committee must have the right to monitor ongoing studies. The researcher must provide monitoring information to the committee, especially about any serious adverse events. No amendment to the protocol may be made without consideration and approval by the committee. After the end of the study, the researchers must submit a final report to the committee containing a summary of the study's findings and conclusions.

Privacy and Confidentiality

  1. who must take every precaution to protect the privacy of research subjects and the confidentiality of their personal information?

Informed Consent

  1. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless they freely agree.
  2. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The possible subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Who should give particular attention to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects and the methods used to deliver the information?

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must seek the possible subject's informed consent, preferably in writing. The non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed if someone cannot express the license in writing.

All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

  1. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study, the physician must be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations, informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual entirely independent of this relationship.
  2. For a potential research subject incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorized representative. Who must not include these individuals in a research study that is unlikely to benefit them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject? Who cannot instead perform the research with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden.
  3. When a potential research subject deemed incapable of giving informed consent can provide permission to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to authorization from the legally authorized representative. Who should respect the potential subject's dissent?
  4. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research. In such circumstances, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorized representative. If no such representative is available and if who cannot delay the research, the study may proceed without informed consent, provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with the condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and a research ethics committee has approved the study. Who must obtain permission to remain in the research from the subject or a legally authorized representative as soon as possible?
  5. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's decision to withdraw from the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
  6. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and reuse. There may be exceptional situations where support would be impossible or impracticable for such research. In such cases, the study may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.

Use of Placebo

  1. The benefits, risks, burdens and effectiveness of a new intervention must be tested against those of the best-proven intervention(s), except in the following circumstances:

Where no proven intervention exists, the use of placebo, or no intervention, is acceptable; or

Where for compelling and scientifically sound methodological reasons, the use of any intervention is less effective than the best proven one, the use of placebo or no intervention is necessary to determine the efficacy or safety of an intervention and the patients who receive any intervention less effective than the best proven one, placebo, or no intervention will not be subject to additional risks of serious or irreversible harm as a result of not receiving the best-proven intervention.

Who must take extreme care to avoid abuse of this option?

Post-Trial Provisions

  1. In advance of a clinical trial, sponsors, researchers, and host country governments should make provisions for post-trial access for all participants who still need an intervention identified as beneficial in practice. Who must also disclose this information to participants during the informed consent process?

Research Registration and Publication and Dissemination of Results

  1. Every research study involving human subjects must be registered in a publicly accessible database before recruiting the first subject.
  2. Researchers, authors, sponsors, editors and publishers have ethical obligations concerning the publication and dissemination of research results. Researchers have to make publicly available the results of their research on human subjects and are accountable for the completeness and accuracy of their reports. All parties should adhere to accepted guidelines for ethical reporting. Negative and inconclusive, as well as positive results, must be published or otherwise made publicly available. Who must declare funding sources, institutional affiliations and conflicts of interest in the publication? What should not accept research reports not following this Declaration's principles for publication?

Unproven Interventions in Clinical Practice

  1. In the treatment of an individual patient, where proven interventions do not exist, or other known interventions have been ineffective, the physician, after seeking expert advice, with informed consent from the patient or a legally authorized representative, may use an unproven intervention if in the physician's judgement it offers hope of saving a life, re-establishing health or alleviating suffering. what should subsequently make this intervention the research object, designed to evaluate its safety and efficacy. In all cases, who must record new information and, where appropriate, make it publicly available?

Principles of Transparency

The journal follows the guidelines specified by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME): https://wame.org/policies.

  1. Website: A journal's website, including its text, shall demonstrate that care has been taken to ensure high ethical and professional standards. It must not include information that might mislead readers or authors, including any attempt to mimic another journal/publisher's site.
  2. An 'Aims & Scope' statement should be included on the website and the readership clearly defined. There should be a statement on what a journal will consider for publication, including authorship criteria (e.g., not considering multiple submissions, redundant publications). ISSNs should be displayed (separate for print and electronic).
  3. Name of Journal: The Journal name shall be unique and not be easily confused with another journal or might mislead potential authors and readers about the journal's origin or association with other journals.
  4. Peer review process: Journal content must be marked as peer-reviewed or not. Peer review is defined as obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers and experts in the field who are not part of the journal's editorial staff. This process and any policies related to the journal's peer review procedures shall be clearly described on the journal website, including the method of peer review used. Journal websites should not guarantee manuscript acceptance or concise peer review times.
  5. Ownership and management: Information about the request and control of a journal shall be indicated on the journal's website. Publishers shall not use corporate or journal names that would mislead potential authors and editors about the nature of the journal's owner.
  6. Governing body: Journals shall have editorial boards or other governing bodies whose members are recognized experts in the subject areas included within the journal's scope. Who shall provide the full names and affiliations of the journal's editorial board or other governing body on the journal's website?
  7. Editorial team/contact information: Journals shall provide the full names and affiliations of the journal's editors on the journal website and contact information for the editorial office, including a complete address.
  8. Copyright and Licensing: The policy for copyright shall be clearly stated in the author guidelines and the copyright holder named on all published articles. Likewise, who shall clearly describe licensing information in guidelines on the website, and licensing terms shall be indicated on all published articles, both HTML and PDFs.  If authors can publish under a Creative Commons license, then who shall note any specific license requirements. who shall state policies on posting final accepted versions or published articles on third-party repositories.
  9. Author fees: Any fees or charges required for manuscript processing and publishing materials in the journal shall be clearly stated in a place that is easy for potential authors to find before submitting their manuscripts for review or explained to authors before they begin preparing their manuscripts for submission. If no such fees are charged, that should also be clearly stated.
  10. Process for identifying and dealing with allegations of research misconduct: Publishers and editors shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, including plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication, among others. In no case shall a journal or its editors encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow it to occur. Suppose a journal's publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct relating to a published article in their journal. In that case, the publisher or Editor follows COPE's guidelines (or equivalent) in dealing with allegations.
  11. Publication Ethics: A journal shall also have policies on publishing ethics. These should be visible on its website and should refer to i) Journal policies on authorship and contributorship; ii) How the Journal will handle complaints and appeals; iii) Journal policies on conflicts of interest / competing interests; iv) Journal policies on data sharing and reproducibility; v) Journal's policy on ethical oversight; vi) Journal's policy on intellectual property; and vii) Journal's options for post-publication discussions and corrections.
  12. Publishing schedule: The periodicity at which a journal publishes shall be indicated.
  13. Access: The way(s) in which the journal and individual articles are available to readers and whether there are associated subscription or pay-per-view fees shall be stated.
  14. Archiving: A journal's plan for electronic backup and preservation of access to the journal content (for example, access to main articles via CLOCKSS or PubMedCentral) in the event a journal is no longer published shall be indicated.
  15. Revenue sources: Business models or revenue sources (e.g., author fees, subscriptions, advertising, reprints, institutional support, and organizational support) shall be clearly stated or otherwise evident on the journal's website. Publishing fees or waiver status should not influence editorial decision-making.
  16. Advertising: Journals shall state their relevant advertising policy, including what will consider types of adverts, who makes decisions regarding accepting adverts, and whether they are linked to content or reader behaviour (online only) or are displayed at random. Advertisements should not be related to editorial decision-making and shall be kept separate from the published content.
  17. Direct marketing: Any direct marketing activities, including solicitation of manuscripts conducted on behalf of the journal, shall be appropriate, well-targeted, and unobtrusive. Information about the publisher or journal is expected to be truthful and not misleading to readers or authors.