Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Introduction and Governance

Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies, published by Gever Verlumun Publishers, is dedicated to the highest standards of publication ethics, editorial transparency, and intellectual integrity. The journal operates in full compliance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA).

2. Research Integrity Principles

All contributors to the journal must uphold foundational standards of scientific practice:

  • Honesty and Rigour: Complete honesty in the design, execution, data collection, and reporting of scholarly research.

  • Transparency: Accurate disclosure of empirical data, methodology, research limitations, and funding mechanisms.

  • Subject Protections: Active safeguarding of the rights, dignity, confidentiality, and physical well-being of all human participants and animal subjects.

3. Editorial and Selection Workflows

The editorial workflow operates under strict, independent scrutiny across three stages:

  • 3a. Initial Desk Screening: Upon submission, manuscripts undergo mandatory administrative checks prior to peer review. Submissions proceed only if they meet the following:

    • Complete thematic alignment with the journal’s aims and scope.

    • Strict conformity with manuscript length (5,000 to 8,000 words), APA 7th Edition style, and anonymisation standards.

    • Comprehensive ethical approvals and consent declarations where human subjects are involved.

    • Verification through Turnitin text-matching software showing an overall similarity index of 20% or less, with no single individual source exceeding 3% (excluding the bibliography and direct quotation strings).

  • 3b. Double-Blind Peer Review: Manuscripts passing the desk check are assigned to at least two external, independent domain specialists. Reviewers submit detailed evaluative reports and formal recommendations to accept, require revisions, or reject.

  • 3c. Final Editorial Decision: Resubmitted manuscripts undergo editorial re-examination and, where necessary, a second round of blind review. The Editor-in-Chief issues the final decision based strictly on intellectual merit and methodological validity. Accepted articles proceed immediately to professional copyediting, typesetting, galley proof validation, DOI minting, and publication.

4. Peer Review Standards

All peer review is conducted on a strictly confidential, double-blind basis:

  • Competence: Reviewers must agree to evaluate only manuscripts that fall squarely within their area of technical expertise.

  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts are privileged communications; downloading, sharing, or discussing manuscript data or content outside the formal review platform is forbidden.

  • Non-Exploitation: Reviewers must never use insights, unpublished findings, or methodologies from submitted works for personal research, professional advantage, or third-party benefit.

  • Conflict of Interest: Potential financial, institutional, or collaborative conflicts of interest must be declared immediately, requiring the reviewer to recuse themselves.

  • Impartiality: Evaluations must remain balanced, evidence-based, and free of bias regarding author nationality, institution, ethnicity, or theoretical school.

  • Identity Integrity: Any attempt to impersonate another scholar, use surrogate accounts, or delegate review assignments to unauthorised researchers constitutes a severe breach of publication ethics.

5. Managing Editorial and Internal Submissions

To maintain absolute impartiality, submissions authored or co-authored by the Editor-in-Chief, Associate Editors, or Editorial Board members are managed through an insulated protocol:

  • The contributing editor or board member is completely isolated within the Open Journal Systems (OJS) workflow and denied administrative access to the submission record.

  • The paper is assigned to an independent Guest Editor or external Section Editor who oversees reviewer selection and evaluation independently.

  • The final decision to accept or reject is made solely by the assigned independent editor. Published articles carry a transparent editorial disclosure outlining the independent handling process.

6. Special Issue and Thematic Section Governance

Special issues are strictly regulated to maintain operational quality:

  • Appointment: Proposals for thematic sections require formal approval by the Editorial Board. Guest Editors must possess an established, internationally verifiable publication record in the designated topic.

  • Workflow Oversight: Guest Editors coordinate the double-blind review process within the journal's official OJS system. However, the Editor-in-Chief retains ultimate oversight and sole authority over all final acceptance and rejection decisions.

  • Conflict Isolation: If a Guest Editor shares an institutional affiliation, historical co-authorship within three years, or a collaborative link with an author, that submission is reassigned to the main editorial office.

  • Institutional Diversity: To avoid institutional bias or self-publishing clusters, special issues must reflect broad geographic and institutional representation. Under no circumstances will a special issue feature authors predominantly affiliated with a single institution.

7. Authorship Standards and Contributor Roles

Authorship carries intellectual accountability and legal responsibility:

  • Criteria: Authorship is restricted to individuals who made substantial intellectual contributions to the conception, design, empirical execution, data analysis, or manuscript drafting, and who have reviewed and approved the final version.

  • Contributor Roles (CRediT): The contribution of every listed author must be declared using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy.

  • Non-Author Contributions: Individuals providing supportive assistance (technical support, language editing, basic data collection, or departmental oversight) must be listed in an Acknowledgements section rather than as authors.

  • Corresponding Author Role: The corresponding author manages administrative correspondence with the journal and ensures all co-authors review proofs and confirm publication terms, but carries equal scholarly responsibility.

8. Policies Governing Authorship Amendments

  • Pre-Acceptance Requests: Adding, removing, or re-ordering authors during peer review requires a formal written request from the corresponding author, detailed intellectual justification, and a signed declaration from every author (including any author being added or removed) agreeing to the change.

  • Post-Acceptance Prohibition: Authorship lists are permanently locked upon formal acceptance. No additions, removals, or rearrangements of authors are permitted once an acceptance notification has been issued.

  • Discretionary Review: The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to reject authorship amendments that appear commercially motivated, fraudulent, or ethically questionable.

9. Affiliation and Metadata Integrity

  • Affiliation Basis: The published affiliation must strictly reflect the institution where the research was conceived, executed, or funded at the time of submission.

  • Affiliation Amendments: Institutional affiliations cannot be altered after manuscript acceptance. If an author moves institutions during the publication process, their new institution may be accommodated solely as an explicit Present Address footnote.

  • Author Contact Details: Corresponding author email updates are permitted up to galley approval, while historical OJS login credentials remain preserved in administrative logs.

10. Plagiarism and Academic Integrity

All submissions are routinely screened using Turnitin. Plagiarism, redundant publication, text recycling, self-plagiarism, and duplicate submission are strictly prohibited. The total similarity index must not exceed 20%, with no single source exceeding 3% (excluding direct, quoted excerpts and bibliography). Any manuscript demonstrating substantive unattributed text copying is immediately rejected.

11. Policy on Generative AI and Machine-Assisted Technologies

  • Authors: Generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Claude, or similar Large Language Models) do not satisfy authorship criteria and cannot be listed as an author or co-author. Authors may use AI exclusively for readability and linguistic refinement under close human supervision, provided full transparency is maintained through an explicit Declaration of Generative AI Use in the methodology or acknowledgements.

  • Visuals and Figures: AI-generated or manipulated images, graphs, and artwork are strictly prohibited unless the algorithmic generation of images forms the central, empirical subject of the study.

  • Reviewers and Editors: Reviewers and editors are strictly prohibited from uploading manuscripts, data, or abstracts into external generative AI platforms. Doing so violates confidentiality, data protection protocols, and author intellectual property rights.

12. Inclusive, Non-Discriminatory Language

Submissions must use inclusive, gender-neutral language (such as the researcher or they rather than gendered pronouns) and avoid terminology that perpetuates systemic bias, stereotypes, or cultural marginalisation.

13. Appeals and Complaints

  • Appeals: Authors may appeal a rejection decision within 14 calendar days of notification by submitting an evidence-based rebuttal letter to the Editor-in-Chief addressing specific reviewer misinterpretations or factual errors. Appeals are evaluated once, and the resulting determination is final.

  • Complaints: Formal complaints regarding editorial conduct, delays, or procedural ethics must be directed in writing to the Editor-in-Chief and the Publishing Director at Gever Verlumun Publishers.

14. Publication Timelines

The journal aims for an efficient, rigorous peer-review and production lifecycle, maintaining an average workflow duration of 8 to 12 weeks from initial submission to online publication.

15. Research Involving Human and Animal Subjects

Empirical studies involving human participants must include explicit statements in the methodology detailing:

  • Formal ethical clearance granted by a recognised Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Research Ethics Committee, citing the approval reference number.

  • Clear procedures used to obtain informed written consent from participants or their authorised representatives.

  • Studies involving animal subjects must document adherence to national and institutional standards for the care and ethical treatment of laboratory animals.

16. Research Involving Vulnerable Populations

Studies involving minors, institutionalised individuals, displaced populations, or other vulnerable groups must document informed consent obtained from parents or legal guardians, along with participant assent where developmental capacity allows. Research protocols must guarantee absolute anonymity and demonstrate enhanced measures to prevent psychological harm or exploitation.

17. Conflicts of Interest and Financial Disclosures

Authors must disclose all commercial, financial, personal, or institutional affiliations that could be construed as exerting an undue influence on the design, analysis, or interpretation of the research. If no competing interests exist, authors must explicitly state: The authors declare no competing interests. Funding sources, project numbers, and the specific role of the sponsor in the research design must be declared.

18. Defamation, Libel, and Freedom of Expression

The journal supports robust academic debate and critical inquiry. However, manuscripts containing unsubstantiated allegations, defamatory statements, or material that infringes upon third-party rights will not be considered.

19. Post-Publication Corrections, Retractions, and Notices

The journal maintains the integrity of the scholarly record in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines:

  • Errata and Corrigenda: Formal, published correction notices linked to the original DOI are issued to address minor errors of fact, typographical mistakes, or minor metadata adjustments that do not undermine the overall conclusions of the study.

  • Expressions of Concern: Issued by the Editor-in-Chief when an investigation into potential research misconduct, data fabrication, or major ethical violations is ongoing, and conclusive findings are pending.

  • Retractions: A formal Retraction Notice is issued when findings are demonstrated to be unreliable due to significant error, scientific misconduct, data fabrication, duplicate publication, or plagiarism. The original PDF is retained with a prominent Retracted watermark, accompanied by an explicit, citable retraction statement explaining the grounds for removal.

20. Zero Tolerance for Scientific Misconduct

Fabrication of data, selective manipulation of empirical figures, falsification of statistical outputs, and unauthorized modification of visual evidence are strictly prohibited. The Editorial Office reserves the right to request raw datasets, statistical logs, and uncropped original image files at any stage of the review or publication process.

21. Ethical Sanctions

Where formal investigations confirm research misconduct or ethical malfeasance, the Editorial Board may enforce the following sanctions:

  • Immediate desk rejection of all active manuscripts under review from the involved authors.

  • Retraction of affected published articles in accordance with COPE protocols.

  • Imposition of a formal publication ban for a period of 3 to 5 years, or indefinitely, covering all imprints managed by Gever Verlumun Publishers.

  • Formal written notification sent to the authors' institutional leadership, vice-chancellors, or funding agencies.

22. Data Availability and Transparency

Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit their anonymised raw research data, survey instruments, codebooks, and computational scripts into recognized, persistent open repositories (such as Zenodo, OSF, or Harvard Dataverse) and cite the persistent DOI within a mandatory Data Availability Statement inside the manuscript.

23. Copyright, Licensing, and Repository Policy

  • 23a. Copyright and Licensing:

    • Authors retain complete, unrestricted copyright in their published work.

    • All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This licence permits non-commercial use, adaptation, and distribution, provided appropriate credit is given and any derivative works are licensed under identical terms.

    • Authors grant Gever Verlumun Publishers a non-exclusive licence to publish, index, host, and permanently disseminate the final work across global networks.

  • 23b. Long-Term Digital Preservation:

    • Published content is preserved through permanent digital archiving arrangements, including the PKP Preservation Network (PN), LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, and Zenodo.

  • 23c. Self-Archiving Policy:

    • Pre-print (Submitted Manuscript): Authors are discouraged from uploading versions under active review to avoid compromising the double-blind review process.

    • Post-print (Accepted Manuscript): Authors may archive the accepted, peer-reviewed version in institutional or thematic repositories.

    • Version of Record (Published PDF): Authors are fully permitted to deposit the final, publisher-formatted PDF into institutional repositories, personal websites, and public scholarly archives immediately upon release, provided full bibliographic attribution and the active DOI link are maintained.

LAST UPDATED: 4 October 2026