Ethical Principles

The Journal of Personal Development and Organizational Transformation is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in academic publishing. We adhere to the principles of integrity, transparency, and accountability in all aspects of the publication process. Our ethical policies are in line with the guidelines provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and other international best practices in scholarly publishing.

Ethical publishing is fundamental to the dissemination of credible and high-quality research. The journal expects all authors, reviewers, and editors to strictly comply with ethical guidelines to maintain the trust of the academic community, policymakers, and practitioners. Any breach of publication ethics, including plagiarism, fabrication of data, or conflicts of interest, will be taken seriously and addressed promptly.

Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to the Journal of Personal Development and Organizational Transformation must adhere to the highest ethical standards in research and publication. The key responsibilities of authors include:

1. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their submission is an original piece of work and has not been previously published or under consideration elsewhere. All sources used in the manuscript must be properly cited, and any verbatim or paraphrased content from other works must be appropriately referenced.

Plagiarism in any form, including self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited. The journal employs iThenticate software to detect plagiarism before peer review. Any manuscript found to contain plagiarized material will be immediately rejected, and repeated violations may result in a ban from future submissions.

2. Data Integrity and Fabrication

Authors must ensure the accuracy and integrity of data presented in their research. Fabrication, falsification, or selective omission of data to manipulate results is considered a severe ethical violation.

If errors are discovered in published work, the authors must promptly notify the editorial office so that necessary corrections or retractions can be made. Retractions or corrections will be issued following COPE guidelines.

3. Authorship and Contribution

All listed authors must have made a significant intellectual contribution to the research and writing of the manuscript. Authorship should be based on the following criteria:

  • Substantial contribution to the conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis of the study.
  • Drafting or critically revising the manuscript for important intellectual content.
  • Approval of the final version of the manuscript before submission.

Ghostwriting (undeclared contributions) and honorary authorship (adding an author who did not contribute significantly) are unethical and not permitted. Any changes to the list of authors after submission must be justified and approved by the editorial board.

4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submissions

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously. Submitting the same research to more than one journal at a time constitutes unethical publishing behavior and will result in immediate rejection.

If authors wish to republish their research in another form (e.g., as a book chapter or conference proceeding), they must obtain written permission from the journal and provide full disclosure of prior publication.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources and Conflicts of Interest

All sources of funding, data, and intellectual contributions must be appropriately acknowledged. If research has been funded by an institution, grant, or organization, authors must disclose this in the acknowledgments section.

Authors must also disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their research, including financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could create bias. The journal reserves the right to request additional information if potential conflicts of interest are identified.

6. Ethical Considerations in Human and Animal Research

For studies involving human participants, authors must state that ethical approval was obtained from an institutional ethics review board and that informed consent was received from all participants. Research involving animals must comply with international ethical guidelines for the humane treatment of animals.

Authors must ensure that personal data (including patient records, interviews, or photographs) are anonymized or have been published with the participant’s explicit consent.

Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

The Journal of Personal Development and Organizational Transformation follows a double-blind peer review process, meaning that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous. Reviewers play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity and quality of the journal. Reviewers are expected to follow these ethical guidelines:

1. Objectivity and Confidentiality

Reviewers must conduct their evaluations impartially and provide objective feedback based on scholarly merit. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and should not be shared, discussed, or used for personal gain. If a reviewer is unable to provide an objective review due to conflicts of interest, they must notify the editor immediately.

2. Promptness and Adherence to Deadlines

Reviewers must complete their evaluations within the specified time frame. If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, they should inform the editorial team as soon as possible so that alternative reviewers can be assigned.

3. Ethical Concerns and Plagiarism Detection

If a reviewer suspects misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or ethical violations, they should report their concerns to the editor confidentially.

Reviewers should also identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors and provide constructive feedback to enhance the manuscript.

Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

The editorial board of the Journal of Personal Development and Organizational Transformation is responsible for overseeing the integrity of the publication process. Editors must adhere to the following ethical standards:

1. Fair and Unbiased Editorial Decisions

Editors must evaluate manuscripts based on their scholarly merit and relevance to the journal's scope, without bias related to nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, or personal relationships.

Decisions to accept or reject a manuscript must be based solely on its quality, originality, and contribution to the field.

2. Confidentiality

Editors must ensure that submitted manuscripts remain confidential during the review process. Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about a manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and other editorial members.

3. Addressing Ethical Violations

In cases of suspected research misconduct, editors will follow COPE guidelines to investigate allegations. The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts or retract published papers in cases of proven ethical violations.

If ethical breaches are detected post-publication, a formal retraction, correction, or expression of concern will be issued.

4. Managing Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not be involved in the review of their own work or research conducted by colleagues or family members. If an editor has a conflict of interest, another editor must handle the manuscript.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

The Journal of Personal Development and Organizational Transformation takes ethical misconduct seriously. Allegations of plagiarism, data manipulation, duplicate submission, or authorship disputes will be investigated thoroughly. The journal follows these steps when handling misconduct:

  1. Preliminary Investigation: If ethical concerns are raised, the editorial team will conduct an initial assessment to determine if further action is required.
  2. Author Communication: If misconduct is suspected, the corresponding author will be contacted for an explanation.
  3. Editorial Review: If concerns are substantiated, the editorial board will decide on appropriate action, which may include rejection, correction, or retraction of the manuscript.
  4. Institutional Notification: In cases of serious misconduct, the author’s affiliated institution may be informed.

All decisions regarding ethical violations will be made transparently, following COPE guidelines.