Ethics for Editors

Overview

Editors at the Journal of Addiction Therapy and Research (JATR) uphold the highest ethical and professional standards. Their actions directly shape the credibility of published research. This policy draws from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct, ICMJE editorial responsibilities, and WAME guidelines.

Editorial Independence

Editors have full authority over the editorial content of the journal. Decisions to accept or reject manuscripts must not be influenced by the publisher, advertisers, or institutional affiliations. Editorial independence safeguards the academic objectivity of JATR.

Confidentiality

Editors must protect the confidentiality of:

• Submitted manuscripts and reviewer identities.
• Author and reviewer communications during peer review.
• Data and ideas disclosed during editorial evaluation.

Information obtained through editorial duties must not be used for personal advantage.

Integrity in Decision-Making

• Decisions are based solely on the manuscript’s academic merit and relevance to the journal’s scope.
• Personal biases, political perspectives, or financial influences must never shape editorial outcomes.
• All decisions should be supported by peer-review evidence and editorial board consultation where needed.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Editors must declare any conflicts—financial, institutional, or personal—that might affect impartial judgment. When conflicts arise, the manuscript must be reassigned to another qualified editor.

Common conflict scenarios include:

• Authorship collaboration with the submitting author.
• Shared institutional affiliations.
• Competitive or personal relationships.

Fairness and Equal Opportunity

Editors should ensure all manuscripts are evaluated fairly and without discrimination based on gender, nationality, ethnicity, religion, or academic affiliation. They must promote equitable participation across all editorial and peer-review processes.

Peer-Review Ethics

• Maintain double-blind confidentiality and reviewer anonymity.
• Avoid selecting reviewers with known conflicts of interest.
• Reject any attempt to influence peer-review outcomes.
• Ensure timely and transparent review management.

Editors must remove inappropriate or biased comments and mediate reviewer-author disputes according to COPE procedures.

Handling Misconduct

Editors must handle allegations of ethical misconduct sensitively and transparently. When misconduct is suspected (e.g., plagiarism, data falsification, authorship disputes), the following steps apply:

1. Initial review of evidence using plagiarism or image-check tools.
2. Consultation with the publisher’s ethics committee.
3. Author notification and opportunity for response.
4. Implementation of COPE’s retraction or correction process as needed.

All investigations must be documented in the editorial system (OJS).

Corrections and Retractions

Editors must ensure the scholarly record is accurate and transparent. Corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern must be issued when errors or misconduct compromise the integrity of published work.

• Minor errors → Erratum
• Significant data inaccuracies → Corrigendum
• Serious ethical issues → Retraction

Data Confidentiality and Research Privacy

Editors must safeguard unpublished data or confidential material shared during review. Such information cannot be used in their own research or disclosed to third parties without written author consent.

Communication and Professional Conduct

• Respond to author and reviewer communications promptly and courteously.
• Use official journal email for correspondence to maintain accountability.
• Avoid any form of coercive or discourteous communication.
• Document all interactions within the editorial management system.

Ethical Training for Editors

All editors should complete regular COPE and ICMJE ethics training. Annual workshops focus on data integrity, reviewer ethics, diversity awareness, and conflict management.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)