Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

HRM RESEARCH: Human Resource Management and Business Journal is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics. This statement sets out the responsibilities of all parties involved in publishing: the publisher, editors, reviewers, and authors. It is based on the Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Responsibilities of the Publisher

Editorial Independence: Siber Publisher Group ensures that commercial considerations, including article processing charges, have no influence on editorial decisions.
Support for Ethical Practice: The publisher supports editors in handling ethical complaints and cooperates with other journals, publishers, and institutions when necessary.
Preservation of the Record: The publisher ensures that published articles remain permanently available and that corrections or retractions are clearly linked to the original article.

Responsibilities of Editors

Publication Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief decides which manuscripts are published, based on originality, significance, clarity, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal's scope. The Editor-in-Chief may consult other editors or reviewers and is bound by legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Fair Play: Manuscripts are evaluated solely on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors' race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, nationality, or political views.
Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff do not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Conflicts of Interest: Editors do not use unpublished material from a submitted manuscript in their own research without the author's written consent, and they withdraw from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
Submissions by Editorial Board Members: Manuscripts submitted by the Editor-in-Chief or members of the editorial board are handled by another editor with no conflict of interest and undergo the same independent peer review as all other submissions. The submitting editor has no access to the review process or the decision.
No Coercive Citation: Editors never require authors to cite this journal or any particular journal as a condition of acceptance. Suggested references must be directly relevant to the manuscript.
Use of AI by Editors: Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, or any part of them, into generative AI tools, as this breaches confidentiality. Editorial evaluations and decisions are made by the editors themselves.
Handling Ethical Complaints: Editors respond promptly to any ethical concern about a submitted or published article, including contacting the authors and, where necessary, their institutions. Concerns are investigated even if they arise years after publication.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists editors in making decisions and helps authors improve their manuscripts.
Promptness: A reviewer who feels unqualified or cannot complete the review on time should inform the editor and decline the invitation.
Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are confidential documents and must not be shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
Objectivity: Reviews must be objective and supported by clear arguments. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should point out relevant published work that has not been cited and inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap with other published work they are aware of.
Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers must not use information obtained through peer review for personal advantage and should decline manuscripts in which they have competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors or related institutions.
Use of AI by Reviewers: Reviewers must not upload manuscripts under review into generative AI tools or use such tools to write their review reports. The scientific assessment must reflect the reviewer's own expertise and judgment.

Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Data must be represented accurately, with sufficient detail to allow replication. Fabricated or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable.
Data and Image Integrity: Fabrication, falsification, or manipulation of data, tables, figures, or images is serious misconduct. Any adjustment to figures must not obscure, remove, or misrepresent the original information.
Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should retain such data for a reasonable period after publication, while protecting participant confidentiality.
Research Involving Human Participants: Research involving human participants, including surveys, interviews, and observations, must be conducted ethically. Authors must obtain informed consent from participants, protect their privacy and anonymity, and state in the manuscript how consent was obtained. Where required by the authors' institution or national regulations, ethical approval must be obtained and its reference number reported.
Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must submit entirely original work and properly cite the words and ideas of others. Plagiarism in any form, including copying, unattributed paraphrasing, and claiming others' results, is unacceptable. Manuscripts are screened in accordance with the journal's Plagiarism Policy.
Multiple or Concurrent Publication: Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time or publish essentially the same research in more than one primary publication.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors must cite publications that have influenced the reported work. Information obtained privately or through confidential services, such as refereeing, may not be used without written permission.
Authorship: Authorship is limited to those who made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. The corresponding author ensures that all co-authors have approved the final manuscript and its submission.
Conflicts of Interest and Funding: Authors must disclose any financial or other conflict of interest and all sources of funding for the research.
Use of Artificial Intelligence: Authors must disclose any use of generative AI tools in preparing the manuscript. AI tools cannot be listed as authors, and authors remain fully responsible for all content. Details are provided in the journal's AI Statement.
Errors in Published Work: Authors who discover a significant error in their published article must promptly notify the editor and cooperate in correcting or retracting it.

Handling Research and Publication Misconduct

Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, image manipulation, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and authorship disputes. Suspected misconduct, whether identified by editors, reviewers, or readers, is investigated following the flowcharts published by COPE. Authors are given the opportunity to respond to any allegation. Depending on the outcome, the journal may reject the manuscript, publish a correction or retraction, inform the authors' institution, or restrict future submissions from the authors involved.

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Correction (Erratum): Published when an error affects part of the article but does not invalidate its findings.
Retraction: Issued when findings are unreliable due to major error, data fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other serious misconduct. Retracted articles remain online and are clearly marked as retracted, with a notice explaining the reason.
Expression of Concern: Published when there are serious concerns about an article while an investigation is still ongoing or inconclusive.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by sending a written explanation to the editorial office at siberpublisher.info@gmail.com. Appeals are reviewed by an editor not involved in the original decision, and the outcome is final. Complaints about the journal's processes, editors, or published content are handled in line with COPE guidance.