Publication Ethics

Authors’ Responsibilities:

1. Reporting Standards

  • Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
  • Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper.
  • A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
  • Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. Data Accuracy

  • Authors are responsible to ensure that all data presented in the manuscript are accurate, reliable and correctly represented.
  • Data report on research findings should be without fabricating, falsifying and manipulating data.
  • Authors should adhere to ethical guidelines for data collection, analysis and presentation, in ensuring no fraudulent or inaccurate data presented in manuscript submitted.

 3. Originality and Plagiarism

  • Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  • In an effort to ensure the highest ethical standards and academic quality, the originality of content of all submissions considered for publication in JCA is verified using Turnitin plagiarism screening service. By submitting the manuscript to JCA, the author agrees to any necessary originality checks that the manuscript may have to undergo during the evaluation or the production process.

 4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

  • Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

  5. Acknowledgement of Sources

  • Authors need to appropriately cite all sources, data and ideas that are derived from other works to give proper credit to the original authors.
  • Authors need to obtain necessary permissions for any content from other works.
  • Authors should be transparent about the contribution of others to the research and writing process, including any funding sources, collaborators and supporting institutions.

  6. Authorship of the Paper

  • Authorship should be restricted to individuals who have substantially contributed to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study being reported. All individuals who have made significant contributions should be credited as co-authors.
  • If there are others who have participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
  • The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included in the manuscript and that no inappropriate co-authors are listed. Additionally, the corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and have consented to its submission for publication.

 7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

  • Authors need to clearly state any conflicts of interest, including financial interests, affiliations or personal connections that could potentially bias the research or its findings.
  • All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

 

Reviewers’ Responsibilities:

 1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

  • Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist in improving the quality of the paper.

2. Standards of Objectivity

  • Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
  • Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

 3. Confidentiality

  • Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the review process and any information supplied by the editor or author.
  • Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  • Copies of the manuscript may not be retained.

 4. Acknowledgement of Sources

  • Reviewers should identify and alert the editor to any relevant published or submitted content substantially similar to or overlapping with that under review that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement, observation, derivation, or argument that had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

 5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

  • Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative, or other relationships between the reviewer and author/connected to the papers)

 

Editors’ Responsibilities:

 1. Publication Decisions

  • The editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal shall be published.
  • The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
  • The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
  • The editor must ensure that all published articles are double-blind peer reviewed.
  • The editor must encourage responsible behaviour and discourage misconduct.
  • In the event of complaints of an ethical or conflicting nature, the editor will adopt and follow reasonable procedures in accordance with the policies and procedures of JCA where appropriate and give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints. All complaints should be investigated no matter when the original publication was approved. Documentation associated with any such complaints should be retained.

 2. Fair Play

  • Manuscripts will be evaluated for their intellectual content without discrimination on grounds of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • Submissions for sponsored supplements or special issues will be evaluated in the same way as other submissions, so that articles are considered and accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence.

 3. Confidentiality, Disclosure, and Conflicts of Interest

  • The editor 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.
  • The editor and any editorial staff must ensure that the information or ideas obtained through peer review will be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
  • JCA may publish submissions from a guest editor in a special issue/section he/she has edited. In such cases, the guest editor is obliged to notify the editorial board before submitting a manuscript to an issue in which he/she is also a guest editor to ensure that there is no conflict of interest in its management and evaluation. Such submissions shall be handled completely independently of the guest-editor, by a member of the journal’s editorial board.

 

Procedures for Dealing with Unethical Behaviour:

Identification of Unethical Behaviour

  • Misconduct and unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.
  • Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations would be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

 Investigation

  • An initial decision would be taken by the editor, who would consult with or seek advice from the publisher, if appropriate.
  • Evidence would be gathered, while avoiding spreading any allegations beyond those who need to know.

 Minor Breaches

  • Minor misconduct might be dealt with without the need to consult more widely. In any event, the author should be given the opportunity to respond to any allegations.

 Serious Breaches

  • Serious misconduct might require that the employers of the accused be notified. The editor, in consultation with the publisher, would make the decision whether or not to involve the employers, either by examining the available evidence themselves or by further consultation with a limited number of experts.

 Outcomes (in increasing order of severity; may be applied separately or in conjunction)

  • Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
  • A more strongly worded letter to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behaviour.
  • Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
  • Publication of an editorial detailing the misconduct.
  • A formal letter to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.
  • Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
  • Imposition of a formal embargo on contributions from an individual for a defined period.
  • Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.

 

 Peer-Review Process:

  • JCA follows strict double-blind peer reviewing of the submitted works which means that the authors’ identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa. Each manuscript is primarily examined by the editor and then subjected to a verification of the originality of content using Turnitin plagiarism screening service before being forwarded for blind peer review.
  •  The review is conducted by a minimum of one independent academic peer in accordance with the standards of objectivity, anonymity, and confidentiality of information, as well as the guidelines of the editorial board.
  • Peer reviewers are selected based on their level of expertise in the field/topic of a manuscript. The final selection of peer reviewers is made by the editorial board.
  • The assessment of the reviewer reports and the decision on the submission is made by the editorial board. After considering the reviewers’ reports, the editorial board will make one of the following decisions:

o   Accept as it is

o   Accept with minor revisions as suggested by the reviewer/s without further review

o   Revise and resubmit for further review

o   Reject

 

Use of Generative AI in Preparing Articles:

  • AI as author: JCA does not accept manuscripts where chatbots or other AI tools are listed as co-authors. The reason for this is that large language models do not meet the criteria for authorship, as they cannot take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity and originality of the content produced.
  • AI as a source of information: JCA does not accept manuscripts that cite chatbots as sources. Content generated by large language models is not reproducible or traceable and may inadvertently contain third-party material without proper attribution.
  • AI as a writing and data presentation aid: JCA accepts manuscripts where chatbots are used as tools to support authors in their research or writing process. Acceptable uses include proofreading, copyediting, structure and style feedback, translation, data analysis and data visualisation.

 

Disclosure Instructions

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by adding a statement at the end of their manuscript in the core manuscript file, before the reference list. The statement should be placed in a new section titled “Declaration on the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in writing”.

AI Disclosure Statement: When preparing this article, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL, VERSION] on [DATE] with the following prompt: “[FULL PROMPT]”, for the purpose of [SPECIFIC PURPOSE]. The author(s) subsequently reviewed and edited the output as necessary and accept(s) full responsibility for the content and integrity of the publication.