Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Malaysian Journal of Co-operative Studies is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics. Therefore, preventing publication malpractice is one of the editorial board’s most essential tasks and responsibilities. This statement is intended for all parties involved in the publishing process: the editor, the reviewer, the author, and the publisher. It is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties of the Editors

1. Publication decisions

The journal’s Chief Editor is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. The Chief Editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by any legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Chief Editor may consult with other editors or reviewers to decide.

2. Confidentiality

The editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

3. Fair play

Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content, regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials revealed in a submitted manuscript must not be utilised in an editor’s research without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas garnered through peer review must be kept confidential and not employed for personal gain.

Duties of the Reviewers

1. Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review helps the Chief Editor make editorial decisions and, through communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

2. Promptness

Any invited reviewers who feel unqualified to review the research presented in a manuscript or know that a timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the Chief Editor so that alternative reviewers can be selected.

3. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorised by the Chief Editor.

4. Standards of objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should clearly express their views with appropriate supporting arguments.

5. Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also bring to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.

6. Disclosure and conflict of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should avoid considering manuscripts with conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscripts.

Duties of the Authors

1. Reporting standards

Authors reporting the results of original research should provide an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented correctly in the manuscript. A paper must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the works and/or words of others, these must be appropriately cited or quoted. The journal allows up to 15% of plagiarism checks to be similar via Plagiarism Checker or any comparable system.

3. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should avoid publishing manuscripts that describe the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4. Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have influenced the nature of the reported work.

5. Authorship of a manuscript

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All individuals who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If others have participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript. Additionally, all co-authors must have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

6. Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with unusual hazards associated with their use, the authors must identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript includes a statement confirming compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, as well as approval from the appropriate institutional committee. The authors should also include a statement indicating that informed consent was obtained for experimentation involving human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be respected.

7. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose any financial or substantial conflicts of interest in their manuscripts that could influence their results or interpretation. Additionally, they should disclose all sources of financial support for the project.

8. Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they must promptly notify the Chief Editor or publisher and cooperate with the Chief Editor to correct or retract the manuscript.

Duties of the Publisher

In instances of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the Chief Editor, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work. The publisher and the Journal do not discriminate based on age, colour, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in publishing programs, services, and activities.