Ethical Principles

Digital Transformation and Administration Innovation (DTAI) is committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in publishing and research dissemination. We adhere to internationally recognized ethical guidelines to ensure transparency, integrity, and fairness throughout the entire publication process. Our approach to publication ethics is designed to maintain the trust of our authors, reviewers, readers, and the broader academic community.

This page outlines the ethical standards that authors, reviewers, and editors must follow in order to maintain the quality, transparency, and credibility of the research published in DTAI.

Ethical Guidelines for Authors

1. Originality and Plagiarism

  • Original Work: Authors submitting manuscripts to DTAI must ensure that their work is original and has not been published previously or is not under consideration for publication elsewhere.
  • Plagiarism: Any form of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, is strictly prohibited. All sources of information, including direct quotations, ideas, data, and research methods that are not original, must be properly cited.
  • Use of iThenticate: Manuscripts will undergo plagiarism detection through iThenticate. If a manuscript is found to contain plagiarized content, it will be rejected, and the authors will be notified.
  • Proper Citations: Authors must cite all sources of information that are directly or indirectly related to their work. Failing to give appropriate credit to the original authors is considered unethical.

2. Data Integrity and Research Methodology

  • Accurate Reporting: Authors must report their research findings and methodology truthfully and in sufficient detail to allow others to replicate the study. Falsification or fabrication of data is considered unethical and will lead to immediate rejection of the manuscript.
  • Data Accessibility: Authors are encouraged to make their raw data available, wherever possible, to support the validity of their findings. Authors may need to submit a data availability statement to ensure transparency.

3. Conflict of Interest

  • Disclosure of Conflicts: Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may have influenced the research or its interpretation. Conflicts of interest may include financial, personal, or professional relationships that could affect the objectivity or outcomes of the study.
  • Non-Disclosure: Failure to disclose a conflict of interest is a serious ethical violation and will result in rejection of the manuscript.

4. Authorship and Acknowledgments

  • Correct Authorship: Only individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or writing of the manuscript should be listed as authors. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission for publication.
  • Acknowledging Contributions: Authors should acknowledge individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet the authorship criteria. This includes funding sources, technical assistance, or other forms of non-authorial support.
  • Changes in Authorship: Any changes to authorship, such as adding or removing authors, must be agreed upon by all involved authors before submission.

5. Ethical Treatment of Participants and Animals

  • Human Participants: If the research involves human subjects, authors must ensure that informed consent was obtained from all participants and that the study complies with ethical standards in line with the Declaration of Helsinki.
  • Animal Research: For studies involving animals, authors must follow appropriate ethical guidelines for the care and use of animals in research, as set forth by relevant institutional and national standards.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

1. Confidentiality

  • Confidential Review: Reviewers must treat all manuscripts under review as confidential documents. They should not share or discuss the manuscript with others without the consent of the editor.
  • Use of Information: Reviewers should not use any unpublished information or data from the manuscript for personal gain or for research purposes.

2. Objectivity and Fairness

  • Impartial Review: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively, focusing solely on the quality of the research. They should not allow personal biases or relationships to influence their assessment.
  • Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide clear, constructive, and respectful feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should avoid making derogatory comments or personal attacks on the authors.

3. Conflicts of Interest

  • Declaration of Conflicts: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest related to the manuscript under review. If a conflict exists (e.g., personal relationships with the authors or financial interests), the reviewer should recuse themselves from the review process.
  • Transparency: If a reviewer feels unable to provide an unbiased review due to any reason (such as a conflict of interest, personal views, or external pressures), they should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

4. Timeliness

  • Review Timeline: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the designated timeframe (typically 4–6 weeks). If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, they must inform the editor as soon as possible.

5. Recognition of Published Work

  • Proper Citation: Reviewers should suggest any relevant literature that the authors may have overlooked, to ensure the work is placed in the appropriate academic context.

Ethical Guidelines for Editors

1. Editorial Independence and Impartiality

  • Independent Decision Making: Editors must ensure that all editorial decisions are made without any personal bias or external influence. All manuscripts must be evaluated based solely on their scientific merit and relevance to the journal’s scope.
  • Fair Evaluation: Editors should treat all manuscripts fairly and consistently, ensuring that decisions are based on peer reviews and the quality of the work rather than the identity of the author(s).

2. Confidentiality

  • Confidential Handling: Editors must handle all manuscripts and associated data confidentially. Manuscripts should not be shared with anyone other than the necessary reviewers and editorial board members.
  • Non-Disclosure: Editors should ensure that the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential during the peer-review process to maintain the integrity of the double-blind review.

3. Conflict of Interest

  • Disclosure: Editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest regarding a manuscript and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict. This includes any financial, professional, or personal relationships that could bias their judgment.
  • Fair Process: If the editor has a conflict of interest with a particular manuscript or author, an alternate editor will be assigned to handle the submission.

4. Review Process Management

  • Transparency: Editors should ensure that the peer-review process is carried out fairly, transparently, and in a timely manner. Manuscripts should undergo double-blind peer review, with at least two or three reviewers providing independent assessments.
  • Ethical Oversight: Editors should be proactive in identifying and addressing any potential ethical issues during the review process, such as plagiarism, data manipulation, or unethical research practices.

5. Retractions and Corrections

  • Retraction Policy: If errors or ethical issues are identified in an article after publication, the editor must initiate a retraction or correction process. Retractions are made when there is clear evidence that the findings are fraudulent or that ethical standards have been violated.
  • Corrections: If minor errors are found in an article post-publication, editors may issue a correction or clarification, ensuring that the scientific record remains accurate.

Ethical Guidelines for Publishers

1. Ethical Publishing Practices

  • Commitment to Integrity: The publisher (in collaboration with the editorial board) must ensure that DTAI adheres to the highest ethical standards in publishing, following established best practices for peer review, data integrity, authorship, and transparency.
  • Respect for Intellectual Property: The publisher respects the intellectual property rights of authors and ensures proper licensing and copyright protection for all published works.

2. Editorial Board and Peer Review

  • Qualified Reviewers: The publisher ensures that the editorial board and peer reviewers are qualified and have the expertise required to evaluate manuscripts thoroughly and impartially.
  • Review Process Transparency: The publisher supports transparency in the review process by making information about the review process accessible to authors, reviewers, and readers.

3. Handling Ethical Violations

  • Investigation of Ethical Concerns: In cases where ethical violations such as plagiarism, data falsification, or other misconduct are suspected, the publisher, in collaboration with the editorial board, will conduct a thorough investigation in line with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
  • Corrective Actions: If violations are confirmed, the publisher may issue a correction, retraction, or apology, depending on the severity of the issue. The publisher supports the integrity of the research process by ensuring that ethical breaches are addressed in a transparent manner.