Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
(based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE‘s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors)
Ethical guidelines for journal publicationJISIS is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
AI Usage Guidelines for Authors, Reviewers, and Editors:may employ AI tools to support grammar correction, formatting decisions, reviewer selection, and administrative tasks. However, all final editorial decisions must be made by human editors, not AI. Any AI use must not compromise author confidentiality or manuscript privacy. Editors are responsible for monitoring and addressing any misuse of AI by authors or reviewers. When AI is used internally in editorial workflows, such usage should be disclosed transparently in the journal’s policy where relevant.
For AuthorsTo promote transparency and uphold ethical publishing practices, this journal outlines clear guidelines for the responsible use of Generative AI tools across all roles. Authors are allowed to use AI tools for basic writing support, including grammar correction, language clarity, and formatting assistance. However, any such use must be explicitly disclosed in the manuscript. A recommended disclosure statement is: “This article was edited with the help of ChatGPT for language improvement. The authors are solely responsible for the content.” AI tools must not be used to generate original research content, results, data, or citations. Authors are strictly prohibited from relying on AI to draft significant portions of the manuscript or from listing AI as a co-author. The final submission must reflect the authors’ independent analysis, interpretation, and scholarly contribution. Authors remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of the work they submit.
For reviewers, AI tools may only be used in a limited capacity, such as for personal note-taking or correcting grammar while reading a manuscript. It is strictly forbidden to use AI for drafting or generating full review comments. Under no circumstances should confidential manuscript content be entered into AI platforms. Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of all materials they access and must not share or upload any part of the submission to third-party services, including AI tools such as ChatGPT or Bard. All reviews must represent the reviewer’s own critical assessment, based on expertise and independent judgment, without AI influence.
Editors may use AI tools for supportive tasks such as improving communication clarity, organizing editorial notes, or assisting in the identification of suitable reviewers. However, the use of AI must not extend to making or influencing editorial decisions on manuscripts. All academic and publication decisions must be made solely by human editors. Editors are also responsible for ensuring that any use of AI complies with applicable data protection regulations and does not compromise author confidentiality. They should actively monitor manuscript submissions for improper AI usage and respond appropriately in accordance with the journal’s ethical publishing standards.