Publication Ethics

Journal of Accounting and Management (JoAM) is committed to being a reputable, peer-reviewed platform and a reliable source of academic information. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies in Accounting, Management, and related fields. Submissions must not be under review elsewhere or previously published in any language. This statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process: authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.

Authors’ Responsibilities

1. Reporting Standards

Authors are expected to present their research accurately and objectively, without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation of data. Manuscripts must contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Deliberate misrepresentation is considered unethical and unacceptable. Submissions should comply with the journal’s formatting and submission guidelines.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

Submitted work must be entirely original. Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time unless co-publication has been agreed upon. Proper citation and acknowledgment of previous work, including the authors' own prior publications, is required. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in quotation marks with appropriate citations.

3. Multiple or Redundant Publication

Authors should avoid submitting the same research to more than one journal or publishing the same findings in multiple venues. Redundant publications are unethical unless clearly disclosed and justified, with primary sources properly referenced.

4. Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must give proper credit to all data sources and references that influenced the research. The contributions of others must always be acknowledged.

5. Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship should accurately reflect each contributor’s role in the research. Only those who have significantly contributed to the design, execution, or analysis of the study should be listed as authors. Others who contributed less substantially should be acknowledged in the acknowledgment section. All listed authors must have approved the final version of the manuscript.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other significant conflicts of interest that could have influenced their results or interpretations. All funding sources must also be declared.

Editors’ Responsibilities

1. Publication Decisions

Editors are responsible for deciding which manuscripts to publish based on peer review and the relevance and significance of the work. Decisions must be guided by the journal's editorial policies and any applicable legal requirements. Editors are accountable for everything published and should uphold the integrity of the publication.

2. Manuscript Review

Editors must initially assess manuscripts for originality and organize peer review fairly. The peer review process should be clearly explained in the journal’s author guidelines. Editors must select qualified reviewers and avoid those with conflicts of interest.

3. Fair Play

Editors must evaluate manuscripts solely on academic merit, without discrimination based on gender, race, religion, nationality, or institutional affiliation. Editorial decisions must be unbiased and based on scholarly content.

4. Confidentiality

Editors must protect the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and ensure that private data, including patient details (if applicable), are handled ethically, with informed consent obtained as needed.

5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished information from a submitted manuscript for personal advantage. They should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

1. Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents. They may not share or discuss content with others unless authorized by the editor.

2. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should ensure authors have cited all relevant sources. If reviewers notice plagiarism, duplication, or ethical concerns, they must inform the editor without conducting further investigation unless specifically requested to do so.

3. Objectivity

Reviews should be objective and constructive, offering clear and supported feedback to help authors improve their work. Suggestions should be specific, distinguishing between essential revisions and optional enhancements.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information obtained during the review must not be used for personal gain. Reviewers must avoid reviewing manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists due to competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with the authors or institutions.

5. Timeliness
Reviewers should accept review assignments only if they can complete them within the agreed timeframe. If unable to meet the deadline, reviewers must inform the editor promptly so alternatives can be arranged.