Statement. IJMS (published by Tinta Emas) adheres to COPE principles and flowcharts. We uphold research integrity across submission, peer review, and post-publication. This policy defines responsibilities, misconduct definitions, and the full lifecycle of corrections and retractions.

Contents: Authors’ Responsibilities • Editors’ Responsibilities • Reviewers’ Responsibilities • Conflicts of Interest • Reusing Third-Party Material • Reproducing Published Material from Other Publishers • Authorship & Changes to Authorship • Misconduct: Definitions • Corrections, Corrigendum & Retractions • Workflow for Allegations & Retraction • Sanctions & Indexing Propagation • Update Notice

1. Originality & Prior Publication. Submissions must be original and not under consideration elsewhere. IJMS rejects redundant/salami publications.
2. Accuracy & Honesty. Report data and methods truthfully—no fabrication, falsification, or deceptive selection of results.
3. Similarity Screening. Acceptable similarity index: ≤ 25% (excluding bibliography/quotes/legitimate methods overlap). Higher scores may be returned or rejected.
4. Data Availability. Preserve primary data and share via reputable repositories where possible; editors/reviewers may request raw data.
5. Human/Animal Ethics. Provide board name and approval number; document informed consent and confidentiality safeguards where applicable.
6. Funding & COI. Disclose all funding and competing interests in the manuscript.
7. Errors & Corrections. Notify the editor promptly of significant errors found pre-/post-publication; IJMS may publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction (see below).
8. AI Tools. Generative AI may not create core scholarly content or references/data; limited grammar/style checks require disclosure (see AI Policy). AI systems cannot be authors.
9. Authorship. Only substantial scholarly contributors qualify as authors; all authors must approve the final manuscript and accept accountability.

1. COPE-Aligned Decisions. Assess on merit and reviewer input—independent of identity, affiliation, or external influence.
2. Confidentiality. Maintain confidentiality for submissions and identities in double-blind review.
3. Recusal. Editors recuse for conflicts (same institution, collaboration within 3 years, personal/financial ties); a substitute editor is assigned.
4. Misconduct Response. Allegations are handled promptly using COPE guidance.
5. Reviewer Exclusion Requests. Reasonable, evidence-based author requests to exclude certain reviewers are considered.

IJMS uses double-blind peer review with two independent experts where feasible.

1. Objectivity. Provide unbiased, evidence-based assessments on merit and clarity.
2. Confidentiality. Treat manuscripts as confidential; do not use unpublished material.
3. Blindness. Do not reveal your identity in reports.
4. Constructive Feedback. Give clear, actionable comments.
5. Timeliness. Submit on time or inform the editor of delays.
6. COI & Alerts. Declare conflicts immediately; flag suspected ethical issues to the editor.

Disclose all financial and personal relationships that could influence the work (employment, consultancies, equity, honoraria, expert testimony). Include a COI statement before the References. If none: “The authors declare no competing interests.”

Editors/reviewers must decline handling/reviewing where conflicts exist.

Obtain permission for third-party figures/tables/schemes/long text extracts/photos not in the public domain or outside your retained rights. Secure permissions before submission and include required captions/attributions.

• Scope. Applies to reproductions of previously published text, figures, tables, photos, and large data excerpts owned by third parties.
• Author obligations. Obtain written permission before submission when the item is not under a compatible open license; retain copies of licenses/permissions for editorial review.
• Captioning. All reproduced/adapted items must include a clear credit line, e.g., “Reproduced with permission from … © [Rightsholder, Year]” or “Adapted from …” plus original citation.
• License compatibility. Third-party license terms prevail for that item; the article’s CC BY-SA applies to the remainder of the work and does not override third-party restrictions.
• Denied permissions. If permission is refused or unclear, remove/replace the item prior to acceptance.

• Criteria. Authorship requires (i) substantial contributions to conception/design, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation; (ii) drafting or critical revision; (iii) final approval; and (iv) accountability for all aspects of the work. Purely administrative, technical, or funding roles do not qualify for authorship and should be acknowledged.
• Order & corresponding author. The author group determines order. The corresponding author ensures that all authors meet criteria, approve the final version, and complete declarations (COI, funding, data availability, AI use).
• Contributor taxonomy. IJMS encourages CRediT statements to specify individual roles (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal Analysis, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing, Supervision, Funding Acquisition).
• Equal contribution. Indicate co-first or co-corresponding contributions via a footnote on the title page.
• Name changes. IJMS will honor post-publication author name change requests (e.g., gender transition, marriage) without public notice where feasible; contact the editorial office.
• Deceased authors. Include a note indicating the author is deceased and list contributions if known; a responsible coauthor must vouch for data and approvals.

Fabrication: Making up data, sources, or results.

Falsification: Manipulating materials, processes, or data to misrepresent findings.

Plagiarism: Using others’ words/ideas without attribution, including self-plagiarism of previously published content.

Improper Authorship: Gift/guest/ghost authorship; inclusion/exclusion contrary to criteria.

1) Erratum (Publisher’s Error)

• When: Production or editorial errors introduced by the journal (e.g., typesetting, figure replacement, metadata).
• Impact: Does not undermine the study’s integrity; corrects the record.
• Notice: Labeled “Erratum”; linked bidirectionally to the article; free to read.

2) Corrigendum (Author’s Error)

• When: Author-originated errors (e.g., mislabeled axes, minor numeric typos, affiliation corrections) discovered post-publication.
• Impact: Conclusions remain valid; the scientific record requires precision.
• Notice: Labeled “Corrigendum”; concise description of the correction; links to the affected sections/figures.

3) Addendum

• When: Ancillary clarifications or additional materials that enhance, but do not alter, the main conclusions (e.g., extra robustness tables).
• Notice: Labeled “Addendum”; peer-reviewed when substantive.

4) Expression of Concern

• When: Credible concerns exist but evidence is incomplete or investigations are ongoing.
• Notice: Temporary; updated once the inquiry concludes (to correction or retraction as appropriate).

5) Retraction

• When: Findings are unreliable (fabrication/falsification/major error), plagiarism, unethical research, duplicate publication, or undisclosed conflicts that invalidate the work.
• Notice: Transparent reason; who is retracting (authors, editor, or publisher); links to the original; watermark or banner “Retracted” on the article PDF/HTML while retaining accessibility.

6) Retraction with Replacement

• When: Critical errors can be corrected with a thoroughly re-reviewed replacement article.
• Notice: States the reason, links both ways (from original to replacement and vice versa); both versions remain in the scholarly record with clear labeling.

A) Trigger & Intake

1. Trigger: Concern raised by reader/reviewer/editor/institution (e.g., plagiarism tip, data doubts).
2. Logging: Editor-in-Chief (EiC) or delegated integrity editor logs the case; acknowledges receipt in 5–10 working days.

B) Preliminary Assessment

1. Screen the claim for specificity and plausibility; check for reporter COI.
2. Run similarity and image/figure checks as needed; review editorial history.
3. Decision point: (i) no case → close with explanation; (ii) minor error → Erratum/Corrigendum; (iii) substantial concern → formal investigation.

C) Formal Investigation

1. Author response: Request a written explanation and supporting evidence (typically within 14 days).
2. Independent assessment: Seek additional expert/statistical review if required.
3. Institutional coordination: Where appropriate, notify and collaborate with the authors’ institutions and/or funders.

D) Outcome & Notice Preparation

1. Outcomes: No action; Correction (Erratum/Corrigendum/Addendum); Expression of Concern; Retraction; Retraction with Replacement.
2. Notice drafting: Plain-language summary of issue, who initiates the notice, and the decision rationale; include links to/from the original record.
3. Labeling: Update article HTML/PDF with clear banners/watermarks (e.g., “Retracted”).

E) Publication & Propagation

1. Publish the notice as a citable document with its own DOI.
2. Update Crossref metadata for the article and the notice to ensure bidirectional linkage.
3. Notify abstracting/indexing services where applicable and update journal site search indices.

F) Communication & Recordkeeping

1. Inform all authors and, where necessary, their institutions/funders of the outcome.
2. Maintain a secure case file with timeline, evidence, correspondence, and decisions.

• Sanctions: For proven misconduct, IJMS may apply time-limited submission bans, revoke editor/reviewer roles, and notify funders/institutions. Repeated or egregious violations may lead to extended sanctions.
• Indexing: Corrections/retractions are pushed via Crossref metadata and reflected on the journal site with explicit labels and links.