Journal of Peer Learning
Publication ethics and malpractice statement
Last updated April 15, 2014.
The Journal of Peer Learning’s publication ethics and malpractice statement is adapted from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the International Standards for Responsible Research Publication for editors (Kleinert & Wager, 2011) and authors (Wager & Kleinert, 2011).
Our peer review process
An article submitted to the Journal of Peer Learning will be assessed by an editor to ensure that the article falls within the journal’s scope and meets basic standards of scholarly writing and research. The article will then be sent to two reviewers for blind review (i.e., the names of the authors will not be disclosed to the reviewers and the names of the reviewers will not be disclosed to the authors unless the reviewers expressly wish to be identified). Articles will be reviewed based on their validity, clarity, originality, and utility (i.e., their usefulness for researchers and practitioners in the field). Authors will receive anonymous feedback from their reviewers together with a publication decision made by an editor, which is guided by reviewers’ comments.
Articles requiring minor revisions can be resubmitted. An editor will then check that the reviewers’ comments have been addressed before accepting the article for publication. Editors may request further revisions if necessary.
Articles requiring major revisions can also be re-submitted. The resubmitted article will then be evaluated by an editor and in most cases will be presented for a further round of blind peer review, preferably by the original reviewers. Again, editors may request further revisions if necessary.
Resubmission of an article with minor or major revisions does not guarantee that the article will be accepted for publication in the journal. Final publication decisions are made by the editors of the journal.
A rejection may be appealed (see below) if the authors are not satisfied that the article was rejected for valid reasons.
Appeals
If an article is rejected by the Journal of Peer Learning, the authors may appeal the decision by writing to the editor-in-chief. An appeal must be justified with detailed reference to the reviewers’ comments. The editor-in-chief will review the appeal in conjunction with the editorial board and decide on an appropriate course of action, which may include further blind reviews of the article. A publication decision may only be appealed once: further appeals will not be considered.
Misconduct, corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions
The Journal of Peer Learning follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions. The case for making a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is evaluated by the editor-in-chief in conjunction with the editorial board. The editor-in-chief is guided by the COPE flowcharts for addressing cases of suspected misconduct.
If you suspect that an article in the Journal of Peer Learning may be in error or is guilty of research misconduct, please write to the editor-in-chief. Correspondence regarding errors and misconduct will be treated confidentially.
Notices of corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions are posted on the Journal of Peer Learning website and as amendments to the relevant articles. Retracted articles remain online but are clearly marked as retracted.
Conflicts of interest
The Journal of Peer Learning requires that editors, reviewers, and authors fully disclose any conflicts of interest. Authors should disclose conflicts of interest in their manuscript. Reviewers should disclose conflicts of interest to the relevant editor. Editors should disclose conflicts of interest to the editor-in-chief.
Editors are not precluded from publishing in the Journal of Peer Learning. If an editor submits an article to the journal, the editor-in-chief will assign a different editor to the article who, as per usual, will be required to disclose any conflicts of interest. If necessary, an independent guest editor will be invited to oversee the peer review of an article submitted by an editor. The article will then be subject to the same process of blind peer review detailed above.
Duties of editors
Editors for the Journal of Peer Learning follow the International Standard for Responsible Research for Editors (Kleinert & Wager, 2011). In summary, the Standard states that:
- Editors are accountable and should take responsibility for everything they publish
- Editors should make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration and ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process
- Editors should adopt editorial policies that encourage maximum transparency and complete, honest reporting
- Editors should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct
- Editors should pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct
- Editors should critically assess the ethical conduct of studies in humans and animals
- Peer reviewers and authors should be told what is expected of them
- Editors should have appropriate policies in place for handling editorial conflicts of interest
Duties of reviewers
Peer reviewers for the Journal of Peer Learning should follow the guidelines for peer reviewers set-out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The COPE guidelines state that reviewers should:
- only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner.
- respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.
- not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organisation’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others.
- declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest.
- not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations.
- be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments.
- provide journal with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise.
- recognise that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct.
Duties of authors
Authors submitting articles to the Journal of Peer Learning should follow the International Standard for Responsible Research Publication for Authors (Wager & Kleinert, 2011). In Summary, the Standard states that:
- The research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
- Researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
- Researchers should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
- Researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere.
- Authors should take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
- The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
- Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.
Authorship criteria
The Journal of Peer Learning follows the authorship criteria set-out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE recommend that authorship be based on the following criteria:
- Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
- Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
- Final approval of the version to be published; AND
- Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Ownership and management
The Journal of Peer Learning is managed by an international Editorial Board and is hosted on Research Online, the University of Wollongong’s open access repository of research publications.
Author fees
The Journal of Peer Learning does not charge authors for submitting or publishing articles in the journal.
Copyright/Permissions
Authors retain copyright of articles published in the Journal of Peer Learning. Authors may grant others the right to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Access
The Journal of Peer Learning is open access.
Publishing schedule
The Journal of Peer Learning is published annually or bi-annually depending on the number of submissions received. The Journal of Peer Learning is only published online.
Archiving
All issues of the Journal of Peer Learning are available on Research Online at http://ro.uow.edu.au/ajpl/all_issues.html
