IJIMS期刊

出版倫理與AI政策

出版倫理與不當行為聲明

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Purpose, Scope, and Status

The International Journal of Information and Management Sciences (IJIMS) is committed to protecting research integrity and maintaining a trustworthy, accurate, transparent, and durable scholarly record. This statement defines the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, editorial staff, and the publisher, and establishes procedures for preventing, identifying, investigating, and correcting publication-ethics concerns.

This policy applies to all submissions, peer-review activities, editorial decisions, published articles, supplementary materials, data and code associated with articles, and communications relating to IJIMS. It applies before submission, during review and production, and after publication. Compliance with this policy does not replace compliance with applicable laws, institutional requirements, funder rules, or discipline-specific ethical standards.

2. Governing Principles and Reference Standards

IJIMS applies the principles of fairness, confidentiality, transparency, accountability, editorial independence, respect for persons, protection of the scholarly record, and proportionate due process. The policy has been developed with reference to the Taiwan journal-evaluation requirements for a publicly available and complete publishing-ethics statement, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and current guidance from major international academic publishers.

Human responsibility: scholarly and editorial judgments must remain under meaningful human control.
Procedural fairness: persons affected by an allegation should ordinarily be informed of the concern and given a reasonable opportunity to respond.
Confidentiality and need-to-know handling: allegations, manuscripts, identities, and evidence must be shared only as necessary for review or investigation.
Evidence-based and proportionate action: editorial measures should reflect the reliability of the evidence, seriousness of the concern, effect on the scholarly record, and applicable COPE guidance.
Correction of the record: IJIMS will act when reliable evidence shows that the published record is inaccurate, misleading, unethical, or otherwise unreliable.

3. Duties of Authors

3.1 Originality, accuracy, and reporting standards

Authors must present an accurate, complete, and balanced account of the research. Data, methods, analyses, results, limitations, and conclusions must not be fabricated, falsified, selectively reported, or misleadingly presented. Manuscripts must contain sufficient methodological detail and appropriate references to permit informed evaluation and, where feasible, replication or reproduction.

3.2 Exclusive submission and prior dissemination

A manuscript must not be under consideration by another journal at the same time. Duplicate publication, redundant publication, salami publication, and undisclosed reuse of substantially the same data, text, tables, figures, or findings are prohibited. Authors must disclose closely related manuscripts, preprints, conference papers, theses, reports, or earlier versions at submission. A journal article developed from a conference paper or other prior version must cite or acknowledge that version and contain a meaningful scholarly extension.

3.3 Authorship, contributorship, and author changes

Authorship is limited to persons who made substantial scholarly contributions, participated in drafting or critically revising the work, approved the final version, and agree to be accountable for the work. Guest, gift, honorary, purchased, coerced, and ghost authorship are prohibited. Contributors who do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged with their permission. IJIMS encourages a contributor-role statement, such as the CRediT taxonomy, where appropriate.

The corresponding author must verify that all listed authors satisfy the authorship criteria, approve the manuscript and author order, and consent to submission. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must include a reason and written agreement from all affected authors. IJIMS may decline a change, suspend processing, or refer unresolved disputes to the authors’ institution; the journal does not adjudicate ownership of authorship credit.

3.4 Citations, permissions, and third-party material

Authors must cite relevant and verifiable sources accurately, ensure that in-text citations match the reference list, avoid citation manipulation and coercive or irrelevant citation practices, and obtain permission for copyrighted or third-party materials when required. Sources suggested or organized with AI assistance must be independently verified against the original publication, including authorship, title, publication details, DOI, and support for the associated claim.

3.5 Ethical oversight, human participants, consent, and privacy

Research involving human participants, personal data, sensitive information, or identifiable images must comply with applicable laws and institutional and national ethical standards. Authors must state the approving or exempting ethics body and approval or exemption identifier when applicable. Informed consent to participate and, where relevant, consent to publish identifiable information must be obtained and documented. Personal data must be minimized, protected, and de-identified where appropriate. Editors may request supporting documentation; failure to provide adequate evidence may result in rejection or further investigation.

3.6 Data, code, materials, and reproducibility

Authors must retain underlying data and relevant records in accordance with legal, institutional, and disciplinary requirements. A Data Availability Statement is strongly encouraged and may be required when necessary for evaluation. Data, code, instruments, protocols, and materials should be shared when ethically and legally permissible. Restrictions based on privacy, consent, confidentiality, security, contractual obligations, or intellectual property must be explained. Authors must not claim that data are available when they are not, and must provide supporting data or records to the journal when reasonably required for an integrity assessment.

3.7 Funding and competing interests

Authors must disclose all funding sources and the funder’s role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit. Authors must also disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal, academic, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work. When no competing interest exists, authors should state this explicitly.

3.8 Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies

Use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies must comply with the separate IJIMS Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies. Substantive use must be disclosed; AI tools cannot be authors; all output, citations, data, code, and images must be verified; and authors remain fully responsible for the manuscript. AI must not be used to fabricate, manipulate, or misrepresent research. When AI forms part of the research method, its use must be described reproducibly in the Methods section.

3.9 Duty to cooperate and correct

Authors must respond promptly and honestly to reasonable editorial inquiries, disclose relevant errors or concerns discovered before or after publication, preserve relevant evidence, and cooperate with corrections, investigations, expressions of concern, or retractions. Non-response does not prevent IJIMS from taking action needed to protect the scholarly record.

4. Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers must assess manuscripts objectively, constructively, respectfully, and within the agreed time. A reviewer who lacks appropriate expertise or cannot complete the review promptly should decline or inform the editor.
Submitted manuscripts, supplementary files, reviewer reports, and related communications are confidential. Reviewers must not share them, contact authors directly, use unpublished information for personal advantage, or upload manuscript content to an external generative-AI service.
Reviewers must disclose actual or potential competing interests, including recent collaboration, shared institutional affiliation, close personal or supervisory relationships, direct competition, or relevant financial interests, and must recuse themselves when impartiality may reasonably be questioned.
Reviewers should identify major methodological, ethical, reporting, originality, or citation concerns and promptly notify the editor of suspected plagiarism, fabrication, undisclosed duplication, peer-review manipulation, or other misconduct. Reviewers must not demand irrelevant citations or use the review process to increase their own citations or those of associates.
Reviewers are responsible for the content and integrity of their reports. AI may not replace independent critical assessment. Any permitted supportive AI use must comply with the IJIMS AI policy and must not compromise confidentiality.

5. Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board

Editorial decisions must be based on academic merit, originality, methodological soundness, relevance to IJIMS, ethical compliance, and the integrity of the review process, without discrimination based on personal characteristics, nationality, institutional affiliation, or political or commercial considerations.
Editors must protect confidentiality, reviewer anonymity under the double-blind model, personal data, and unpublished information. Confidential manuscript material must not be uploaded to external generative-AI services.
Editors must disclose and manage competing interests. An editor must not handle a submission authored by the editor, a close relative, a recent collaborator, a direct supervisee or supervisor, or another person with whom impartiality could reasonably be questioned. Such manuscripts must be assigned to an independent editor and follow the journal’s usual procedures.
Editors must select qualified and independent reviewers, consider the quality and substance of review reports, seek additional review where reports are inadequate or conflicting, and provide a reasoned editorial decision. Review recommendations inform but do not determine the editor’s decision.
Editors must respond to credible concerns before or after publication, preserve relevant records, follow fair procedures, seek specialist or institutional input when necessary, and take proportionate action to correct the scholarly record.
Editorial board members share responsibility for supporting the journal’s ethical standards, declaring conflicts, participating in policy review and training, and avoiding use of their position for personal, institutional, or citation advantage.

6. Duties of the Publisher

Tamkang University, as the publisher of IJIMS, supports the Editor-in-Chief, editors, reviewers, and editorial staff in safeguarding the integrity and continuity of the scholarly record. The publisher shall:

respect editorial independence and not permit commercial, administrative, political, fundraising, or personal considerations to determine acceptance or rejection;
maintain and publicly communicate journal policies, ownership, governance, contact information, peer-review model, author instructions, and publication-ethics standards;
support fair investigation of suspected misconduct, complaints, appeals, corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions, including communication with institutions or authorities when appropriate;
protect personal data, confidential materials, copyright, licensing information, and the integrity and accessibility of publication records;
ensure that corrections, retractions, and other post-publication notices are clearly identified, permanently linked, and retained as part of the scholarly record; and
review policies and editorial practices periodically, provide appropriate guidance or training, and address systemic risks such as peer-review manipulation, paper mills, identity fraud, citation manipulation, and misuse of AI.

7. Peer-Review Integrity

IJIMS uses double-blind peer review. After initial scope, completeness, and integrity checks, manuscripts meeting basic requirements are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers. The journal may reject a manuscript without external review when it is out of scope, clearly fails minimum scholarly or ethical standards, or presents an integrity concern that prevents reliable review.

Authors must not attempt to influence reviewer selection through false identities, fabricated contact details, undisclosed relationships, review rings, agencies, or other manipulation. Reviewers and editors must not delegate their responsibilities without authorization. IJIMS may verify identities, affiliations, email addresses, reviewer expertise, authorship, data, and submission history. Evidence that the peer-review process has been compromised may lead to rejection, retraction, notification of institutions, and restrictions on future participation.

8. Forms of Misconduct and Unacceptable Practice

Misconduct and unacceptable practices include, but are not limited to:

plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, copyright infringement, and misappropriation of ideas, data, images, code, or confidential material;
data or image fabrication, falsification, deceptive manipulation, selective suppression, or misleading reporting;
duplicate submission, redundant publication, undisclosed overlapping publication, or fragmentation intended to misrepresent novelty;
authorship sale, fictitious or unverifiable authorship, guest or ghost authorship, identity theft, false affiliations, or undisclosed third-party manuscript production;
citation manipulation, coercive citation, irrelevant citation, fabricated references, or organized citation schemes;
peer-review manipulation, fabricated reviewers, review rings, unauthorized review delegation, or interference with editorial decisions;
failure to disclose significant competing interests, funding, prior dissemination, ethical approval, consent, or substantive AI use; and
retaliation, harassment, discrimination, intimidation, knowingly false allegations, destruction of evidence, or refusal to cooperate with a legitimate integrity inquiry.

9. Handling Allegations and Integrity Concerns

IJIMS will assess concerns in a manner consistent with COPE guidance, applicable law, due process, and the need to protect the scholarly record. The following framework applies, with adjustments appropriate to the circumstances:

Receipt and documentation. The editorial office records the concern, source, affected manuscript or article, available evidence, and any immediate risk.
Preliminary assessment. The Editor-in-Chief or an unconflicted delegate determines whether the concern is specific, credible, within IJIMS’s remit, and requires further inquiry. Frivolous, abusive, or unsupported allegations may be closed with reasons recorded.
Conflict management. Anyone with a relevant conflict must recuse. Allegations involving the Editor-in-Chief are referred to an independent senior editor or appropriate publisher representative.
Author or participant response. Persons whose work or conduct is questioned are ordinarily informed of the substance of the concern and given a reasonable opportunity to respond and provide records, unless notification would create a legal, safety, evidence-preservation, or investigation risk.
Evidence review and external referral. IJIMS may seek independent expert advice and may contact institutions, funders, ethics bodies, other journals, publishers, databases, or authorities when they are better placed to investigate or when coordinated action is necessary.
Interim protection. IJIMS may pause review or publication, preserve records, replace a conflicted reviewer or editor, or publish an Expression of Concern when substantial credible risk exists but findings are not yet conclusive.
Decision and action. The journal records the evidence considered, response received, rationale, and proportionate action. Relevant parties are informed to the extent permitted by confidentiality, law, and integrity considerations.
Follow-up. IJIMS monitors compliance with required corrections or other actions and updates the scholarly record when new reliable evidence becomes available.

Anonymous concerns may be considered when they contain specific and verifiable information. The identity of a complainant will be protected as far as reasonably possible, but absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed where disclosure is required by law or necessary for a fair investigation.

10. Corrections, Retractions, Expressions of Concern, and Removal

Correction. A correction is appropriate when an error or omission affects the article or its interpretation but does not invalidate the main findings. The notice must state what was corrected and be linked to the article.

Retraction. Retraction may be appropriate when findings are unreliable because of error or misconduct, when there is plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, compromised peer review, unverifiable authorship, serious undisclosed competing interests, or another major breach that causes the editor to lose confidence in the article. A retraction notice must identify the article, state the reason and basis, indicate who is retracting it, and remain linked to the article. The original record should ordinarily remain accessible and clearly marked as retracted.

Expression of Concern. An Expression of Concern may be issued when substantial and credible concerns exist but the evidence is inconclusive, an investigation is pending or unreasonably delayed, or immediate notice is needed to alert readers.

Removal. Complete removal is exceptional and may be considered only where continued availability creates a serious legal, privacy, safety, or other compelling risk. Bibliographic information and a removal notice should be retained whenever legally and technically possible.

Post-publication action may proceed without the agreement of all authors when necessary to protect the scholarly record. Notices must be transparent, neutral, accessible, dated, and permanently linked. Metadata and indexing services should be updated where feasible.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders may submit a complaint about journal procedures, staff, editors, the editorial board, or the publisher, or an appeal against an editorial decision. Complaints and appeals must identify the relevant manuscript or article and provide specific reasons and supporting information.

An appeal must address a material factual error, procedural irregularity, unmanaged conflict, or substantial misunderstanding; disagreement with academic judgment alone is not sufficient.
The original decision may be reviewed by the responsible editor. Where independence is required, the matter will be assigned to an unconflicted editor or publisher representative who was not responsible for the disputed action.
IJIMS may seek an additional review or expert opinion, but an appeal does not guarantee re-review or reversal. The outcome will be communicated with a concise rationale.
Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief will be handled independently by the publisher or a designated senior academic without a relevant conflict.
Abusive, repetitive, threatening, discriminatory, or bad-faith communications may be closed or subject to communication limits, while substantive evidence of an integrity concern will still be assessed.

Complaints and appeals should be submitted through the official IJIMS contact channel shown on the journal website. IJIMS aims to acknowledge receipt promptly and will provide updates when a matter requires extended investigation. Complex cases, external institutional inquiries, and legal or privacy issues may require additional time.

12. Confidentiality, Data Protection, and Recordkeeping

IJIMS will collect and use personal information only for legitimate editorial, publication, integrity, administrative, and legal purposes. Access to manuscripts, reviewer identities, allegations, correspondence, evidence, and decision records is limited to persons with a legitimate need to know. Records relevant to editorial decisions or integrity matters will be retained for an appropriate period consistent with institutional policy, legal obligations, and the need to document the scholarly record.

Confidentiality may be limited when disclosure is required by law, necessary to prevent serious harm, required for a fair investigation, or needed to contact an institution, funder, ethics body, other journal, publisher, or authority with appropriate responsibility. Any disclosure should be proportionate and documented.

13. Transparency, Monitoring, and Policy Review

This statement will be publicly available on the IJIMS website and cross-referenced in the Guide to Authors, reviewer guidance, editorial procedures, and the separate generative-AI policy. IJIMS will review this policy at least annually and sooner when publication standards, laws, technologies, or journal operations materially change. Material revisions should be dated and approved through the journal’s governance process.

The editorial office should maintain internal records sufficient to demonstrate implementation, including conflict-of-interest recusals, reviewer selection, decision letters, complaints and appeals, integrity cases, corrections and retractions, policy approvals, and periodic editorial-board review. Public reporting may be provided in aggregated form without compromising confidentiality.

14. Effective Date and Transitional Application

This revised policy becomes effective upon approval by the Editor-in-Chief and publication on the IJIMS website. It applies to new submissions and to ongoing or post-publication matters addressed after the effective date. Where an earlier policy governed conduct at the relevant time, IJIMS will apply the version appropriate to the circumstances while taking any action necessary to protect the scholarly record.

Reference Standards and Public Sources