Publication Ethics

Dynamics of Rural Society Journal is a peer-reviewed journal that upholds the ethics of publication. Publication Ethics is addressed to all parties involved in the process of publishing scientific articles including: Authors, Chief Editor, Managing Editor, Editorial Board, Technical Editors, Reviewers, and Publishers. This statement refers to COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

PUBLICATION ETHICS GUIDELINES FOR JOURNALS

Dynamics of Rural Society Journal takes seriously violations of publication ethics such as duplication, plagiarism, fabrication, repeated publication, and conflicts of interest. Dynamics of Rural Society Journal views plagiarism and the like as serious offences. We ensure that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Department of Sociology, Faculty of Social Sciences, State University of Gorontalo, Indonesia and the Editorial Board will assist in communication with other journals and/or publishers if necessary and useful.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief

Journal Leadership and Policy Direction

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for providing leadership, direction, and oversight for the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

The Editor-in-Chief determines, maintains, and develops the journal’s title, focus and scope, publication frequency, editorial policies, peer-review policies, publication ethics policies, and strategic direction in accordance with the aims of the journal and recognized standards of scholarly publication.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the journal is managed in a professional, transparent, accountable, and ethically responsible manner.

Editorial Independence and Integrity

The Editor-in-Chief must uphold editorial independence and scholarly integrity in all stages of the editorial and publication process.

Editorial decisions must be made independently and must not be influenced by commercial interests, political pressure, institutional pressure, personal relationships, sponsors, funders, journal owners, indexing ambitions, accreditation targets, or other improper external influences.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that editorial decisions are based solely on the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, clarity, validity, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Accreditation and Journal Development

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for initiating, coordinating, and overseeing applications for journal accreditation, indexing, or other quality assurance processes where necessary.

The Editor-in-Chief must work to continuously improve the quality, visibility, credibility, accessibility, transparency, and academic impact of the journal.

Efforts to improve accreditation, indexing, visibility, or journal metrics must not compromise editorial independence, peer-review standards, publication ethics, or the integrity of published content.

Continuity of Publication

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for supporting the continuity and regularity of the journal’s publication schedule.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal is published according to its established periodicity and publication plan.

The continuity of publication must not compromise the quality, integrity, peer-review standards, or ethical requirements of the journal.

Initial Manuscript Evaluation

The Editor-in-Chief must strictly evaluate submitted manuscripts at the initial stage to determine their suitability with the journal’s focus and scope, basic academic quality, ethical requirements, and submission standards.

Manuscripts that are clearly outside the journal’s focus and scope, do not meet minimum scholarly standards, fail to comply with essential submission requirements, or present serious ethical concerns may be rejected before being assigned to the Editorial Board or peer reviewers.

Initial evaluation may include checks for originality, completeness of submission files, ethical approval statements, authorship information, conflict of interest declarations, funding statements, data availability statements, and compliance with the journal’s author guidelines and publication ethics policy.

Compliance with Journal Template and Guidelines

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that submitted manuscripts comply with the journal’s author guidelines, formatting requirements, citation style, reference style, and manuscript template.

The Editor-in-Chief may request technical or administrative corrections before a manuscript proceeds to the next stage of the editorial process.

Failure to comply with essential journal requirements may result in the manuscript being returned to the authors for correction or rejected from the editorial process.

Confidentiality of Manuscripts and Editorial Information

The Editor-in-Chief must guarantee the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and related editorial materials.

Confidential materials include submitted manuscripts, reviewer identities, reviewer reports, author responses, editorial correspondence, unpublished data, ethical approval documents, conflict of interest declarations, funding statements, system records, and all information obtained through the editorial and peer-review process.

The Editor-in-Chief must not disclose, distribute, discuss, copy, quote, share, or use any confidential information about a manuscript with anyone outside the editorial and publication process, except where necessary and authorized for journal management, peer review, ethical investigation, legal compliance, or publication processing.

Confidentiality must be maintained before, during, and after the editorial and publication process.

Appointment of Editorial Board Members and Reviewers

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for selecting and appointing Editorial Board members and reviewers who have appropriate knowledge, expertise, experience, integrity, and professional standing in accordance with the focus and scope of the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that members of the Editorial Board and reviewers are selected based on academic competence, professional reputation, ethical conduct, relevant expertise, and their ability to contribute to the quality and integrity of the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief should periodically evaluate the performance, contribution, professionalism, and ethical conduct of Editorial Board members and reviewers.

Assignment of Manuscripts

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that manuscripts are assigned to appropriate Editorial Board members, section editors, or handling editors based on their expertise, competence, availability, and absence of conflicts of interest.

The assignment process must support fair, objective, efficient, timely, and accountable editorial handling.

If a conflict of interest, lack of expertise, or other concern is identified, the manuscript must be reassigned to another qualified and independent editor or Editorial Board member.

Oversight of the Editorial and Peer-Review Process

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for overseeing the editorial and peer-review process to ensure that all manuscripts are handled fairly, objectively, confidentially, consistently, transparently, and in accordance with the journal’s policies and publication ethics standards.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that peer review is conducted by qualified reviewers with relevant expertise and that reviewer comments are considered carefully before an editorial decision is made.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the journal’s peer-review model, such as single-blind, double-blind, open peer review, or another model, is clearly stated and applied consistently.

Prevention of Peer-Review Manipulation

The Editor-in-Chief must take reasonable steps to prevent peer-review manipulation and other forms of interference with the editorial process.

This includes preventing, identifying, and addressing false reviewer identities, fabricated reviewer accounts, inappropriate reviewer suggestions, undisclosed conflicts of interest, coercive citation requests, fabricated review reports, compromised peer review, and improper attempts to influence reviewers or editorial decisions.

If peer-review manipulation is suspected, the Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the concern is investigated in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy and that appropriate editorial action is taken.

Final Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief has the authority to make or approve the final editorial decision regarding the acceptance, revision, rejection, withdrawal, correction, expression of concern, or retraction of manuscripts or published articles, in accordance with the journal’s policies.

Such decisions must be made based on reviewer recommendations, editorial assessments, journal policies, ethical considerations, the reliability of the work, and the overall suitability of the manuscript for publication in the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that final decisions are fair, reasoned, timely, and consistent with the journal’s editorial and ethical standards.

Disclosure and Management of Conflicts of Interest

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that conflicts of interest in the editorial and peer-review process are properly identified, disclosed, and managed.

Conflicts of interest may arise from personal relationships, professional relationships, institutional relationships, supervisory relationships, collaboration, competition, financial interests, academic disputes, professional rivalry, ideological positions, or other connections with the authors, reviewers, institutions, funders, organizations, communities, or companies involved in a manuscript.

If the Editor-in-Chief has an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest with a submitted manuscript, the manuscript must be handled by another qualified and independent editor or Editorial Board member.

In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief must recuse themselves from the editorial process and must not influence reviewer selection, editorial discussion, peer-review management, or final decision-making regarding the manuscript.

Manuscripts Submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, Editors, or Editorial Board Members

Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, Editorial Board members, journal staff, or individuals with close personal, professional, institutional, or supervisory relationships with them must be handled through an independent editorial process.

Such manuscripts must be assigned to an editor or Editorial Board member who has no conflict of interest with the authors or the manuscript.

The Editor-in-Chief, editors, or Editorial Board members with conflicts of interest must not influence reviewer selection, peer-review management, editorial discussion, or final decision-making regarding their own manuscripts or manuscripts involving related parties.

Such submissions must be evaluated according to the same standards of quality, ethics, peer review, and editorial decision-making as all other manuscripts.

Call for Papers, Special Issues, and Thematic Issues

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding whether a Call for Papers, Special Issue, or Thematic Issue is necessary to support the development of the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that any Call for Papers, Special Issue, or Thematic Issue is consistent with the journal’s focus and scope, editorial policies, peer-review procedures, publication ethics, and scholarly standards.

Special Issues and Thematic Issues must be subject to the same ethical standards, peer-review requirements, editorial independence, conflict of interest management, and transparency principles as regular issues.

Guest editors, where appointed, must follow the journal’s editorial policies, peer-review procedures, conflict of interest requirements, and publication ethics standards.

Coordination with the Editorial Board

The Editor-in-Chief must coordinate with the Editorial Board in managing the journal and supporting its continuous development.

This coordination includes discussing editorial policies, publication strategies, manuscript quality, peer-review performance, ethical issues, indexing, accreditation, publication timelines, complaints, appeals, and other matters related to the improvement of the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief must encourage constructive participation from Editorial Board members while maintaining clear responsibility for editorial leadership and ethical oversight.

Promotion and Visibility of the Journal

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for promoting the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal to relevant academic communities, institutions, researchers, professional associations, and other stakeholders.

Promotion must be conducted ethically, professionally, accurately, and transparently, with the aim of increasing the journal’s visibility, readership, submission quality, and scholarly impact.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that journal promotion does not include misleading claims, false indexing information, unrealistic publication promises, guaranteed acceptance, inappropriate solicitation, or any practice that may compromise the journal’s credibility or publication ethics.

Handling Complaints, Appeals, and Ethical Concerns

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that complaints, appeals, allegations of publication misconduct, and ethical concerns are handled fairly, objectively, transparently, consistently, and in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Complaints and appeals must be considered carefully and must not be handled by individuals who have a conflict of interest in the matter.

When necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may request clarification from authors, reviewers, editors, complainants, institutions, funders, or other relevant parties.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that appropriate action is taken when ethical concerns arise, including plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, redundant publication, fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, confidentiality breaches, peer-review manipulation, citation manipulation, unethical research practices, or other forms of publication misconduct.

Post-Publication Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that appropriate action is taken when significant errors, inaccuracies, ethical concerns, or publication misconduct are identified before or after publication.

Post-publication actions, including corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions, must be issued when necessary to correct the scholarly record and protect the integrity of the literature.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions must be handled transparently, clearly, promptly, and in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that such notices are linked to the affected article and provide sufficient information to explain the reason for the editorial action, while avoiding defamatory or unsupported statements.

Documentation and Record Keeping

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that appropriate records are maintained for editorial decisions, peer-review processes, reviewer selections, conflicts of interest, complaints, appeals, ethical concerns, corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and other relevant editorial actions.

Such records must be maintained in accordance with the journal’s policies, confidentiality requirements, and applicable legal or institutional regulations.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools and External Platforms in Editorial Work

The Editor-in-Chief must maintain confidentiality, security, integrity, accountability, and transparency when using any digital tool, artificial intelligence tool, language model, translation tool, editorial platform, or external service in editorial work.

The Editor-in-Chief must not upload, share, disclose, or process confidential manuscript content, reviewer reports, author responses, editorial correspondence, unpublished data, ethical documents, reviewer identities, or other confidential journal materials using artificial intelligence tools, external platforms, or third-party services without permission from the journal and without appropriate confidentiality protection.

If the journal permits the use of artificial intelligence tools or similar technologies in editorial work, the Editor-in-Chief must ensure that such use is governed by clear journal policies and disclosed, documented, or reported where required.

Artificial intelligence tools must not be used as a substitute for independent editorial judgment, ethical responsibility, scholarly expertise, or accountability.

Upholding Publication Ethics and Academic Integrity

The Editor-in-Chief must uphold publication ethics, academic integrity, transparency, accountability, and scholarly responsibility in all stages of the journal’s editorial and publication process.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the journal’s policies and practices are consistent with recognized standards of ethical scholarly publishing.

The Editor-in-Chief must act when concerns arise about the integrity, reliability, legality, or ethical compliance of submitted or published content.

Final Responsibility for Journal Integrity

The Editor-in-Chief has final responsibility for maintaining the academic quality, editorial credibility, ethical integrity, transparency, and reliability of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that all published articles have undergone appropriate editorial assessment, ethical consideration, and peer-review procedures in accordance with the journal’s policies.

The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the journal continuously improves its editorial management, peer-review quality, ethical oversight, publication transparency, and contribution to scholarly communication.

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

Professional Responsibility and Active Contribution

Editors of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal must work professionally, ethically, and responsibly in accordance with their duties and roles.

Editors are expected to contribute actively to the management, development, quality improvement, credibility, and integrity of the journal’s editorial and publication processes.

Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editors must uphold editorial independence and scholarly integrity in all stages of the publication process.

Editorial decisions must be made independently and must not be influenced by commercial interests, political pressure, institutional pressure, personal relationships, sponsors, funders, journal owners, or other improper external influences.

Editors must ensure that editorial decisions are based solely on the academic quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, clarity, validity, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Fair and Objective Editorial Process

Editors must ensure that every manuscript submitted to the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal is handled through a fair, objective, transparent, consistent, and accountable editorial process.

Each manuscript must be assessed based on its academic merit and suitability for the journal, without discrimination or improper influence.

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by the authors’ ethnicity, religion, race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, institutional affiliation, academic seniority, political views, personal background, or other non-academic factors.

Initial Screening and Suitability with Journal Focus and Scope

Editors are responsible for assessing whether a submitted manuscript is aligned with the focus and scope of the journal.

If a manuscript is clearly outside the journal’s focus and scope, does not meet the basic submission requirements, does not follow the journal’s author guidelines, or is unsuitable for the journal’s readership, editors have the right to reject the manuscript without sending it to the peer-review process.

Initial screening may also include checks for originality, completeness of submission files, ethical approval statements, authorship information, conflict of interest declarations, funding statements, and compliance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Ensuring Originality and Ethical Compliance

Editors must make reasonable efforts to ensure that manuscripts submitted to the journal are original, have not been previously published, and are not under consideration by another journal or publisher.

Editors must take appropriate steps to prevent, identify, and address plagiarism, self-plagiarism, text recycling, duplicate publication, redundant publication, data fabrication, data falsification, image manipulation, improper authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, unethical research practices, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, and other forms of publication misconduct.

If there are indications of ethical problems, editors may seek clarification from the authors, consult reviewers or relevant experts, request supporting documents or raw data, and take appropriate editorial action in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Peer Review Management

Editors are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts requiring peer review are reviewed by qualified and competent reviewers with relevant expertise.

Editors must ensure that the peer-review process is conducted fairly, objectively, confidentially, transparently, consistently, and in a timely manner.

Reviewer comments and recommendations must be considered carefully before an editorial decision is made. However, the final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief or the responsible editor in accordance with the journal’s editorial policy.

The journal must clearly state the type of peer-review process used, such as single-blind, double-blind, open peer review, or another model, and must apply the process consistently to all manuscripts.

Prevention of Peer-Review Manipulation

Editors must take reasonable steps to prevent peer-review manipulation and other forms of interference with the editorial process.

This includes preventing or addressing the use of false reviewer identities, fabricated reviewer accounts, inappropriate reviewer suggestions, undisclosed conflicts of interest, coercive citation requests, attempts to influence reviewers improperly, and attempts to influence editorial decisions through unethical means.

If peer-review manipulation is suspected, editors must investigate the concern in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy and take appropriate editorial action.

Editorial Decision-Making

Editors must provide critical, systematic, fair, and objective consideration of the suitability of each manuscript for publication.

Editorial decisions must be based on the quality, originality, relevance, clarity, validity, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Editors must ensure that decisions are communicated clearly to authors and are supported by appropriate editorial reasoning, reviewer comments, or journal policy where applicable.

Communication with Authors and Reviewers

Editors must communicate editorial decisions, revision requests, reviewer comments, publication requirements, ethical concerns, and other relevant information to authors clearly, respectfully, and professionally.

Authors should be encouraged to revise and resubmit their manuscripts within the specified time frame after receiving editorial or reviewer feedback.

Editors must also maintain constructive communication with reviewers to support an effective, responsible, timely, and ethical peer-review process.

Confidentiality of Manuscripts

Editors must treat all submitted manuscripts and related documents as confidential materials.

Editors must not disclose, distribute, discuss, quote, copy, share, or use any part of a submitted manuscript or related information with anyone outside the editorial and peer-review process, except where necessary and authorized for the purpose of journal management, ethical investigation, legal compliance, or publication processing.

Confidentiality must be maintained before, during, and after the editorial and peer-review process.

Prohibition on Use of Unpublished Materials

Editors must not use unpublished data, findings, interpretations, arguments, methods, images, tables, research instruments, or analysis contained in submitted manuscripts for their own research, teaching, publication, personal advantage, professional advantage, or the advantage of others without the written permission of the authors.

Privileged information obtained through the editorial process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal, academic, commercial, or professional gain.

Disclosure and Management of Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest related to a submitted manuscript.

Conflicts of interest may arise from competition, collaboration, personal relationships, supervisory relationships, institutional relationships, financial interests, academic disputes, professional rivalry, ideological positions, or other relationships with the authors, institutions, funders, organizations, communities, or companies involved in the manuscript.

If a conflict of interest exists, the relevant editor must not evaluate, select reviewers for, influence, or make decisions regarding the manuscript.

Another qualified and independent editor who has no conflict of interest should be assigned to handle the manuscript.

Manuscripts Submitted by Editors

Manuscripts submitted by editors, journal staff, or individuals with close personal, professional, institutional, or supervisory relationships with them must be handled through an independent editorial process.

Such manuscripts must be assigned to an editor who has no conflict of interest with the authors or the manuscript.

Editors with conflicts of interest must recuse themselves from the editorial process and must not influence reviewer selection, editorial discussion, peer-review management, or final decision-making regarding the manuscript.

The journal must ensure that such submissions are evaluated according to the same standards of quality, ethics, peer review, and editorial decision-making as all other manuscripts.

Protection of Academic Freedom and Integrity

Editors must uphold academic freedom, freedom of expression, responsible scholarly debate, and scholarly integrity throughout the publication process.

Editors should encourage critical academic discussion while ensuring that published content complies with ethical, legal, and scholarly standards.

Editors must take reasonable steps to prevent the publication of defamatory, discriminatory, unlawful, misleading, or ethically problematic material.

Handling Complaints, Appeals, and Ethical Concerns

Editors must handle complaints, appeals, and allegations of publication misconduct fairly, objectively, transparently, consistently, and in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Complaints and appeals must be considered carefully and must not be handled by individuals who have a conflict of interest in the matter.

When necessary, editors may request clarification from authors, reviewers, complainants, institutions, or other relevant parties.

Editors may take appropriate actions, including rejection of a manuscript, request for correction, publication of a correction notice, expression of concern, retraction, withdrawal, or other editorial action in accordance with the journal’s policies and ethical standards.

Post-Publication Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

Editors must take appropriate action when significant errors, inaccuracies, ethical concerns, or publication misconduct are identified before or after publication.

Post-publication actions, including corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions, must be issued when necessary to correct the scholarly record and protect the integrity of the literature.

Corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions must be handled transparently, clearly, and in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Documentation and Record Keeping

Editors should maintain appropriate records of editorial decisions, peer-review processes, reviewer selections, conflicts of interest, complaints, appeals, ethical concerns, corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, and other relevant editorial actions.

Such records should be maintained in accordance with the journal’s policies, confidentiality requirements, and applicable legal or institutional regulations.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Editorial Work

Editors must maintain confidentiality, integrity, accountability, and transparency when using any digital tool, artificial intelligence tool, language model, translation tool, or external platform in editorial work.

Editors must not upload, share, disclose, or process confidential manuscript content, reviewer reports, author responses, editorial correspondence, unpublished data, images, tables, or other confidential materials using artificial intelligence tools, external platforms, or third-party services without permission from the journal and without appropriate confidentiality protection.

If the journal permits the use of artificial intelligence tools or similar technologies in editorial work, editors must disclose or document such use where required by the journal.

Artificial intelligence tools must not be used as a substitute for independent editorial judgment, ethical responsibility, scholarly expertise, or accountability.

Continuous Improvement of Publication Quality

Editors must continuously evaluate and improve the quality, consistency, transparency, credibility, integrity, and efficiency of the journal’s editorial and publication processes.

This includes improving manuscript screening, peer-review management, editorial decision-making, publication timelines, ethical oversight, author guidelines, reviewer guidelines, editorial policies, journal workflows, and publication ethics procedures.

Consultation and Strategic Development

Editors should actively discuss and seek input from authors, reviewers, readers, editors, publishers, advisory members, and other relevant stakeholders regarding strategies to improve the quality, visibility, credibility, accessibility, and impact of the journal.

Such consultation should be conducted in a professional, ethical, transparent, and responsible manner and must support the development of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal as a credible scholarly publication.

Final Responsibility for Published Content

Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic quality, editorial credibility, and ethical integrity of the journal.

Although authors are responsible for the content of their manuscripts, editors must ensure that all published articles have undergone appropriate editorial assessment, ethical consideration, and peer-review procedures in accordance with the policies of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

Editors must act when concerns arise about the integrity, reliability, legality, or ethical compliance of submitted or published content.

Duties and Responsibilities of the Author

Responsibility for Manuscript Content

Authors are responsible for the entire content of manuscripts submitted to and published in the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal. Authors must ensure the accuracy, integrity, validity, and reliability of the data, analysis, interpretation, arguments, findings, and conclusions presented in the manuscript.

Authors are also responsible for ensuring that all questions related to the accuracy, integrity, and ethical compliance of the work are properly addressed and resolved.

Originality, Prior Publication, and Exclusive Submission

Authors must declare that the manuscript submitted to the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal is their original work, has not been previously published in any language, is not under consideration by another journal or publisher, and will not be submitted elsewhere while under review by the journal.

Authors must not submit the same or substantially similar manuscript to more than one journal or publisher at the same time.

Plagiarism, Duplicate Publication, and Proper Citation

Authors must ensure that the manuscript, in whole or in part, does not contain plagiarism, self-plagiarism, text recycling, duplication, fabrication, falsification, redundant publication, or any other form of unethical publication practice.

When authors use the work, ideas, data, words, theories, arguments, findings, images, tables, instruments, or opinions of others, they must clearly and accurately cite the source and include the reference in the bibliography.

The Dynamics of Rural Society Journal regards plagiarism, duplication, fabrication, falsification, redundant publication, and any form of unethical publication practice as serious offences.

Authorship and Contributorship

All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation, data collection, analysis, interpretation, drafting, or critical revision of the manuscript.

All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission to the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal. Each author must take responsibility for their own contribution and must be willing to cooperate in resolving any questions related to the accuracy, integrity, or ethical compliance of the manuscript.

Authors must ensure that no person who has made a significant contribution is excluded from authorship, and that no person who has not contributed substantially is included as an author.

Any changes to authorship after submission, including addition, removal, or rearrangement of author order, must be approved by all authors and justified to the editor.

Suitability with Journal Focus and Scope

Authors must ensure that the focus and scope of the study presented in the manuscript are in accordance with the focus and scope of the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

Manuscripts that do not correspond to the journal’s focus and scope may be rejected before or during the editorial review process.

Compliance with Author Guidelines and Journal Template

Authors must ensure that the manuscript follows the writing guidelines, formatting requirements, citation style, reference style, and journal template established by the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

Failure to comply with the journal’s author guidelines may result in the manuscript being returned to the authors for correction or rejected from the editorial process.

Data Availability, Access, and Retention

Authors may be required to provide raw data, supporting materials, research instruments, documentation, or other relevant evidence related to the manuscript for editorial review.

Authors must retain such data and supporting materials for a reasonable period after publication and make them available when reasonably requested, in accordance with applicable ethical, legal, institutional, and journal policies.

Authors must ensure that data are presented honestly and transparently and that no data are fabricated, falsified, manipulated, selectively omitted, or misrepresented.

Ethical Approval, Human Participants, Animals, and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants, animals, personal data, interviews, surveys, observations, institutional information, communities, organizations, or sensitive materials must comply with applicable ethical standards, legal requirements, and institutional policies.

Authors must obtain ethical approval, informed consent, research permission, institutional approval, or other necessary authorization where required.

The manuscript must clearly state the approval, consent, or permission obtained, including the name of the relevant ethics committee, institution, association, community authority, organization, or legal authority where applicable.

Where ethical approval is not required, authors should state this clearly in the manuscript where appropriate.

Confidentiality, Privacy, and Sensitive Data Protection

Authors must protect the confidentiality and privacy of research participants, institutions, organizations, communities, and other relevant parties involved in the research.

If the manuscript involves confidential data, personal information, business practices, marketing practices, institutional records, community information, or other sensitive materials, authors must clearly explain how such data are protected.

Authors must ensure that the disclosure of information in the manuscript does not violate ethical, legal, institutional, contractual, or community obligations.

Hazards and Safety Considerations

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, equipment, materials, fieldwork, locations, social situations, or activities that may pose unusual risks or hazards, authors must clearly identify these risks in the manuscript.

Authors must confirm that appropriate safety procedures, permissions, and risk mitigation measures were followed during the research.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may influence, or appear to influence, the research, analysis, interpretation, writing, review, or publication of the manuscript.

All forms of financial and non-financial support must be clearly stated, including grants, employment, consultancy, ownership of resources, paid expert testimony, patent applications or registrations, institutional support, sponsorship, research funding, project funding, or other funding schemes.

If there are no conflicts of interest or funding sources to declare, authors should clearly state this in the manuscript.

Use of Copyrighted or Third-Party Materials

Authors who wish to include figures, tables, images, maps, instruments, datasets, text passages, questionnaires, archival materials, or other materials that have been previously published or are owned by third parties must obtain written permission from the copyright holder where required.

Evidence of such permission must be submitted to the journal when requested.

Any material submitted without clear evidence of third-party ownership or permission will be assumed to originate from the authors. Authors remain responsible for any copyright, licensing, or permission issues related to materials included in the manuscript.

Respectful, Non-Defamatory, and Lawful Content

Authors must ensure that the manuscript does not contain statements that insult, demean, discriminate against, defame, slander, harass, or unlawfully harm individuals, groups, institutions, communities, organizations, or other parties.

Authors must ensure that the manuscript is written in a respectful, scholarly, ethical, and lawful manner.

Revision and Correction Responsibilities

Authors are required to respond to editorial and reviewer comments carefully, honestly, respectfully, and within the specified time.

Authors must revise and resubmit the manuscript according to the journal’s procedures and provide clear explanations for any changes made.

If authors choose not to follow certain editorial or reviewer suggestions, they must provide a reasoned and respectful explanation.

Fundamental Errors, Corrections, and Retractions

When authors discover significant errors, inaccuracies, omissions, or ethical problems in their submitted, accepted, or published work, they must immediately notify the editor-in-chief or publisher.

Authors must cooperate with the editor and publisher to correct the manuscript, issue an erratum or corrigendum, publish a correction notice, retract the article, or take other appropriate actions in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics policy.

Authors must not conceal errors, data problems, authorship disputes, conflicts of interest, ethical violations, or other matters that may affect the integrity of the published record.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Authors who use artificial intelligence tools, language models, or similar technologies in preparing the manuscript must disclose their use where required by the journal.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, validity, reliability, and ethical compliance of the manuscript, including any content generated, edited, translated, summarized, or assisted by artificial intelligence tools.

Artificial intelligence tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the content, approve the final version, disclose conflicts of interest, or be accountable for ethical and legal obligations.

Authors must not use artificial intelligence tools to fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or misrepresent data, citations, images, references, analysis, interpretations, conclusions, or any other part of the manuscript.

Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers assist the editor in making editorial decisions by providing objective, constructive, fair, and scholarly evaluations of manuscripts submitted to the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal.

Through the peer-review process, reviewers may also help authors improve the quality, clarity, rigor, originality, and academic contribution of their manuscripts.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the editor.

Constructive and Substantive Review

Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts constructively, comprehensively, systematically, and substantively.

The review should assess the quality, originality, relevance, methodology, theoretical grounding, analysis, interpretation, argumentation, presentation, ethical compliance, and contribution of the manuscript to the field of rural society studies.

Reviewers must provide clear, specific, evidence-based comments, corrections, and recommendations to the editor in a professional and respectful manner.

Objectivity, Fairness, and Non-Discrimination

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively based on the academic quality, integrity, relevance, and scholarly merit of the work.

Reviewers must not be influenced by the authors’ ethnicity, religion, race, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, institutional affiliation, academic seniority, political views, personal background, or other non-academic considerations.

Reviewers must avoid personal criticism of the authors and must ensure that their comments are fair, respectful, evidence-based, and intended to improve the manuscript.

Confidentiality of Manuscripts

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts received for review as confidential documents.

Reviewers are not allowed to share, discuss, distribute, copy, quote, cite, disclose, or use any part of the manuscript or related information outside the peer-review process without permission from the editor.

The confidentiality of manuscripts submitted to the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal must be maintained before, during, and after the review process.

Reviewers must not contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript without permission from the editor.

Prohibition on Delegation or Unauthorized Involvement

Reviewers must not delegate the review or involve another person in the review process without prior permission from the editor.

If reviewers believe that another person, such as a colleague, assistant, or researcher with relevant expertise, should contribute to the review, they must first obtain approval from the editor.

Any person who is permitted to assist with the review must also comply with the journal’s confidentiality, conflict of interest, and ethical review requirements.

Protection of Anonymous or Blind Peer Review

Where the Dynamics of Rural Society Journal applies anonymous, single-blind, double-blind, or other confidential peer-review procedures, reviewers must respect the integrity of the review model used by the journal.

Reviewers must not attempt to identify the authors in anonymous or double-blind review processes. Reviewers must not disclose their own identity to the authors.

Prohibition on Use of Unpublished Materials

Reviewers must not use unpublished data, arguments, interpretations, findings, methods, images, tables, references, or analysis obtained from manuscripts under review for their own research, teaching, publication, personal advantage, professional advantage, or the advantage of others without the written permission of the authors.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal, academic, commercial, or professional gain.

Timeliness and Communication with the Editor

Reviewers should accept a review invitation only if they have the necessary expertise and are able to complete the review within the required or agreed time frame.

Reviewers must complete and submit their review reports within the time frame determined by the journal or agreed upon with the editor.

If reviewers are unable to complete the review within the specified time due to urgent circumstances, lack of expertise, workload, conflict of interest, or other reasons, they must immediately inform the editor so that appropriate steps can be taken, including extending the review period or assigning the manuscript to another reviewer.

Review According to Area of Expertise

Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts that fall within their area of expertise.

If reviewers realize before or during the review process that the manuscript is outside their competence, they must immediately inform the editor.

Reviewers may recommend that the editor invite additional reviewers with relevant expertise where necessary.

Identification of Similarity, Plagiarism, or Ethical Concerns

Reviewers should notify the editor as early as possible if they identify or suspect substantial similarity, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, text recycling, duplicate publication, redundant publication, data fabrication, data falsification, image manipulation, unethical research practices, improper citation, citation manipulation, authorship concerns, undeclared conflicts of interest, or other potential ethical problems in the manuscript.

Reviewers should also inform the editor if they are aware of relevant published or unpublished work that has not been properly cited by the authors.

Reviewers should provide sufficient information or explanation to assist the editor in assessing the concern, while avoiding unsupported accusations.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may affect, or appear to affect, their ability to evaluate the manuscript objectively and fairly.

Conflicts of interest may arise from competition, collaboration, personal relationships, institutional relationships, supervisory relationships, financial interests, academic disputes, professional rivalry, ideological positions, or other relationships with the authors, institutions, funders, organizations, communities, or companies involved in the manuscript.

If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers must decline the review invitation or immediately notify the editor and follow the editor’s decision.

Ethical and Professional Conduct

Reviewers must conduct the review process ethically, professionally, responsibly, and respectfully.

Reviewers must not intentionally delay the review process, use the peer-review process to advance their own interests, exploit privileged information, or make recommendations for personal, financial, institutional, or professional advantage.

Reviewers must not request unnecessary citations to their own work, the work of colleagues, the journal, or other publications where the citation is not academically justified.

Reviewers should ensure that their recommendations are based on the quality, integrity, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the manuscript.

Comments to Authors and Confidential Comments to the Editor

Reviewers should ensure that comments intended for authors are constructive, respectful, clear, specific, and useful for improving the manuscript.

Confidential comments to the editor must be relevant, fair, evidence-based, and consistent with the reviewer’s assessment of the manuscript.

Reviewers must not use confidential comments to make unsupported allegations, discriminatory statements, personal criticism, or comments that would be inappropriate to communicate in a scholarly review process.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Peer Review

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and the integrity of the peer-review process when using any digital tool, artificial intelligence tool, language model, translation tool, or external platform.

Reviewers must not upload, share, process, or disclose manuscript content, review reports, unpublished data, images, tables, or any confidential information from the manuscript using artificial intelligence tools, external platforms, or third-party services without permission from the editor or journal.

If the journal permits the use of artificial intelligence tools or similar technologies in the review process, reviewers must disclose such use to the editor where required.

Reviewers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, fairness, confidentiality, and ethical compliance of their review reports.

Artificial intelligence tools must not be used as a substitute for the reviewer’s own scholarly judgment, expertise, and accountability.

Final Recommendation to the Editor

Reviewers must provide a clear recommendation to the editor regarding the manuscript, such as acceptance, minor revision, major revision, resubmission, or rejection, in accordance with the journal’s review criteria.

The recommendation must be supported by clear reasons and consistent with the reviewer’s comments and evaluation.

The final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the editor, based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the journal’s policies, the manuscript’s quality and relevance, and the ethical standards of scholarly publication.

 

CORRECTION ACTION ON ARTICLES THAT DO NOT ACCORDANCE WITH JOURNAL PUBLICATION ETHICS

Journal editors should consider retraction when:

1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of behavioral error (eg falsification of data) or research error (eg discretionary or experimental error).
2. Previous findings have been published elsewhere without cross-reference, permission or proper justification (eg in the case of over-publication).
3. There are indications of plagiarism.
4. Reporting/publishing research results that are not in accordance with scientific ethics.

Journal editors should take this seriously when:

1. They accept inconclusive research evidence or publication errors by the authors.
2. There is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors' agency will not investigate the case.
3. They believe that investigations into alleged misconduct related to publication have not been, or are not, fair and impartial or conclusive.
4. Investigations are underway but assessments will not be available for a considerable period of time.

Journal editors should consider issuing a correction (Corrigendum) when:

1. A small percentage of publications that are declared reliable prove misleading (mainly due to research errors).
2. The list of authors/contributors is incorrect (eg an eligible author has been omitted or someone who does not meet the authorship criteria has been included).
3. Retraction is usually not necessary if a change of authorship is required but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings.

Article retraction/retraction: Retraction is a mechanism for correcting the literature and alerting readers to publications that contain data that is so erroneous or erroneous that their findings and conclusions cannot be relied on. Unreliable data can be caused by research errors. The main purpose of retraction is to correct the literature and ensure its integrity rather than to punish writers who misbehave.

Who should issue the revocation?

Articles may be retracted by their author or by the journal editor. In some cases, the revocation is done with or on behalf of the journal publisher. However, as the responsibility for the journal's content rests with the editor, he or she should always have the final say on retracting the material. Journal editors may retract publication (or issue an expression of concern) even if all or some of the authors refuse to withdraw the publication themselves.

When should publication be withdrawn?

Publications must be withdrawn as soon as possible after the journal editor believes that the publication is completely false and misleading (or exaggerated or plagiarized). Immediate retraction should minimize the number of researchers citing incorrect work, acting on their findings or drawing wrong conclusions, such as from double-counting 'over-publications' in meta-analyses or similar examples.