Integrity is the foundation of all our works. The loss of integrity is the loss of trust. And without trust we have nothing. Any aspiring scholars wishing to publish their works in Interdisciplinary Research Review is well advised to be honest and straight in your intention and submission. Never submit any fault information thinking one will get away with such lapse in integrity. The best advice from Editor in Chief is for contributors, reviewers and all relevant parties who play key role in the making of this publication, to make sure you go through the guideline and checklist point by point and ensure adherence without fail to be successful.

1. Editor’s Duties

Editor shall determine whether or not a submitted article shall be published.  The work is done in collaboration with members of the Editorial Board and guided by the framework and Editorial Policy.

1.1 Peer Review

Editor shall see to it that peer review process is unbiased, fair and timely. Research articles must be reviewed by 3 reviewers, with expert knowledge and best practice in their field. Editor shall watch for potential conflicts of interest to prevent potential bias and self citation made by reviewers.

1.2 In the interest of Fairness

Submitted article shall be evaluated by intellectual merit with no prejudice over race, belief system, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or political inclination of the authors. The editorial policies of the journal favor transparency and full integrity. Editor shall ensure that journal's standard electronic submission system is in good working order for smooth  communications. A transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions shall also be available.

1.3 Confidentiality

Confidentiality of all articles to the journal and all communications with reviewers must be kept. Disclosure only with the consent of authors and reviewers. The editor may exchange information with editors of other journals in order to investigate any research misconduct.

Reviewers’ name and identities are kept secret unless the journal is operating an open peer-review system and/or reviewers agreed to disclose their names. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and not used for personal advantage.

1.4 Competing Interests

Editor must not make decisions about  articles which he/she has written him /herself or have been written by family or colleagues or products or services in which the editor has an interest. Any submission must be assessed by the journal’s normal procedures without special treatment.

1.5 Vigilance over Published Record

The editor must strive to maintain the integrity of the publication by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer and editorial), in conjunction with the publisher.

Editor may contact the author of article to provide due consideration to complaint or claims made, also include communications to relevant institutions and research bodies. The editor shall use of publisher's systems for the detection of misconduct/plagiarism. It is never too late to do the right thing, so should there be any misconduct there should be a prompt response by publishing correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant.

2. Reviewers’ Duties

Peer review is about making contribution to the editorial decision.  Reviewer may also assist the author in improving the article. Reviewers should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process, if they cannot perform in timely manner with quality.

2.1 Ethical Issues

A reviewer should be watch for any ethical issues in the paper and bring it to the editor’s awareness. Including any similarity or overlap between the submitted article and other published paper known to the reviewer. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should prove the point with relevant citation.

2.2 Objectivity and Conflict of Interest

Reviews should be done objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing an article. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with reasons, explanation and cases in point. Reviewers should inform the Editor before agreeing to review an article where there could be a potential conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the article. If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer's (or their associates') work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not with the intention of increasing the reviewer's citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work (or that of their associates).

3. Authors’ Duties

According to World Health Organization, it is stipulated that “All research involving human beings should be reviewed by an Ethic Committee to ensure that the appropriate ethical standard are being upheld.” Therefore, any article which is related to aforementioned topics is required to be submitted with an attached copy of Research Ethics Approval Certificate.

3.1 Standards of Reporting

Original research reports should stipulate accurate account of work done as well as an objective discussion of its importance. All data and information should be presented precisely in the article containing sufficient detail and references to allow others to reiterate the work. Deceitful statements constitute unethical behavior are not acceptable. Review and professional publication articles must be objective and accurate, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly declared to be the case.

3.2 Data Access and Retention

Authors may be required to submit research data supporting their paper for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to their data, and should keep such data after publication for a number of years.

3.3 Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources

The authors must guarantee to submit only original works. And give appropriate  acknowledgement of other people’s quotation or seek their permission when necessary. Authors should cite publications that influenced the content and context of their works.

Any private information, from conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written consent from the source.

Plagiarism in any shape or form, duplicating any parts of other articles (with no reference) is unacceptable.

3.4 Tautology, Multiple and Concurrent Publication

Author should avoid publishing articles that mirror research in other journal of primary publication.  No submitting of the same article to more than one journal which is unethical and unacceptable.

Author should not submit a paper that has been published previously or make multiple submissions to many publications simultaneously. Except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint.

With the exception of some articles like clinical guidelines, translations, etc. which under certain conditions it may be reasonable to allow secondary publication, which contain the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.

3.5 Non-Disclosure

Reviewers and Editors are committed to keep information obtained from authors as confidential and will not be disclosed or used only for the purpose of Journal publication, unless with the written consent of the authors themselves could that information be used in other matters.

3.6 Authorship of the Article

Only those with real and valuable contribution to the article should be acknowledged as the rightful author(s).  So academic recognition will be made only to relevant and qualified individuals.

3.7 Rules on Tests on Human and Animal

Any experimental work on human and animal subjects are expected to comply with Ethics Certificate  as well as Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association and and all the guidelines pertained to them.

3.8 Conflict of Interests

Individual private interests should not exceed the interests for the Greater Good of society and the truth seeking in scientific endeavours.  Interdisciplinary Research Review only encourage unbias research and try not to be the tool or propaganda of interest group or corporation.  Any grant or funding received shall be declared and acknowledged in the interest of integrity.

3.9 Detection of Errors after Publication

If any mistake or error has been identified after publication, effort will be made by editor to collaborate with relevant author to make correction and report to readers in later publication.

3.10 Perception Manipulation is not allowed

Manipulating Image or data findings in order to mislead or guide the public to the wrongful conclusion is deemed unacceptable.

3.11 Clinical Trial Transparency

IRR Journal stands for straight report of clinical trial, say it as it is, without bending the reality. All editors and authors are expected observe best practice in clinical trial and CONSORT guidelines.

4. Declaration of interest

All authors are required to declare any financial and personal relationships with organizations or persons that could influence or result in bias of their work. Competing interests range from employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations to grants or other funding. Authors must disclose their interests in two places: 1. Declaration of interest statement in the title page file (if double-blind) or the manuscript file (if single-blind). If there are no interests to declare then write this: “Declarations of interest: none”. This statement will be published if the article is accepted. 2. Detailed disclosures as part of a separate Declaration of Interest form, which forms part of the journal's official records. It is important for potential interests to be declared in both places and that the information do not contradict.

5. How does IRR cope allegations of research misconduct?

IRR is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethics and integrity in research and publication. We take all allegations of research misconduct very seriously, including but not limited to plagiarism, improper citation use, and data fabrication. Our response to such allegations is guided by ethical rules as follows:

  • The Chief Editor and the Editorial Board meticulously evaluate the evidence and adhere to ethical standards in conducting a thorough investigation upon receiving an allegation of research misconduct
  • The accused author(s) will be provided with a chance to dispute the allegations
  • IRR maintains confidentiality throughout the investigation process to protect the privacy and reputation of all individuals involved
  • If the IRR finds evidence of misconduct, appropriate action will be taken based on ethical standards, which may include removing, correcting, or reporting the concern and
  • If allegations are found to be either made up or lacking adequate proof and are therefore dismissed, all the relevant participants will be notified about the conclusion.

To maintain the integrity of our readers, authors, and reviewers, we work diligently to prevent and correct research misconduct. We encourage all participants  to report research-related issues  through our established channels, and they will be dealt with promptly in an ethical guidelines.

6. Report Ethical Problem

The IRR places a high emphasis on upholding ethical standards in article publication. We want to assure you that any misconduct you encounter can be reported. To do this, you can send an email directly to our journal’s email address. Your assistance helps us preserve these ethical standards and your feedback contributes to the betterment of the research society.

Your report will be managed by IRR with a commitment to confidentiality and professionalism, ensuring that necessary measures will be implemented as required.

IRR greatly values your commitment to the research community. For any additional general inquiries, kindly utilize the contact information provided on our website.