JMVRA is dedicated to the highest standards of publication ethics and applies the guidelines issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors, editors and reviewers alike are expected to keep to these standards. Ethical conduct is a shared duty, so raise any doubt early rather than leaving it until after submission.
Author Responsibilities
- Work that is submitted has to be original, free of plagiarism and not in review anywhere else
- Every source, dataset and contribution needs proper acknowledgement
- Listed authors should match those who really contributed, and ghost authorship is banned
- Any conflict of interest has to be declared by authors when they submit
- Making up, altering or selectively reporting data is strictly forbidden
- Submitting the same work twice, or plagiarising your own earlier work, is not allowed
Editorial Responsibilities
- Editors judge manuscripts purely on academic merit and without discrimination
- Editors keep submitted manuscripts confidential
- Editors disclose conflicts of interest and step aside from the matter
- Every allegation of research misconduct is looked into by editors
Reviewer Responsibilities
- A reviewer with a conflict of interest has to refuse the review
- Information from a review stays strictly confidential and is never used for personal benefit
- Reviewers give feedback that is objective, constructive and prompt
- Reviewers are not to approach authors directly
Malpractice Handling
Plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication and unethical authorship are dealt with by following COPE flowcharts. JMVRA retains the right to retract published articles when misconduct after publication is established, and the retracted article will be replaced by a retraction notice.
Examples of Misconduct
| Type | Example |
|---|---|
| Plagiarism | Taking text or ideas without giving credit |
| Fabrication | Making up data or results |
| Falsification | Altering data, images or methods |
| Duplicate publication | Putting out the same work two times |
| Authorship misconduct | Authorship that is gifted, ghosted or bought |
| Citation manipulation | Forced or excessive citing of one's own work |
Avoiding Honest Mistakes
- Retain raw data and records — so others can verify the results
- Add citations while writing — rather than later from memory
- State prior versions — such as theses, preprints or conference papers
- Settle authorship in writing — ahead of submitting
- Fix errors quickly — get in touch with the journal when you spot a mistake after publication
Practical Tips for Meeting Publication Ethics Standards
Ethical problems often begin as small oversights rather than deliberate wrongdoing. These routines help authors prevent common issues and show good faith throughout the publishing process.
- Agree authorship early. Discuss who contributed what, and in what order names will appear, before writing begins. Late disputes over credit damage collaborations and can delay a manuscript.
- Keep raw data and notes. Store original data, analysis files and field notes in an organised way so you can answer questions about results long after the paper is accepted.
- Quote and paraphrase carefully. Mark quotations clearly and cite the source even when you change wording. Reusing your own earlier text without acknowledgement can also be treated as a problem.
- Obtain consent and approvals. If your study involves people, animals or sensitive records, secure the required permissions from the relevant body and state them clearly in the manuscript.
- Correct mistakes without delay. If you spot an error after submission or publication, tell the editor promptly and plainly. Quick honesty is usually received far better than a concealed problem.
Agree credit early, document your work, cite generously and report mistakes quickly, because ethical habits are built before problems appear.
Questions Researchers Often Ask
At-a-Glance Checklist
- Fair authorshipEach author made a contribution
- Honest dataNothing invented
- Credit givenYour own earlier work too
- Conflicts disclosedStated in the manuscript
- Concerns raised[email protected]
Your Paper's Journey at JMVRA, From Submission to Publication
- SubmitA paper ID is issued
- ScreenScope & similarity
- ReviewDouble-blind
- DecideEmail & SMS
- ReviseAnswer every point
- AcceptCopyright & fee
- ProduceDOI available on request
- PublishMonthly issue
How long review takes depends on the reviewers and on any revision required, so no set turnaround is promised; you are told of acceptance or rejection by email and WhatsApp.
Ready to Publish? Submit to JMVRA
JMVRA is aligned with UGC's Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
JMVRA is a Transparent, Peer-Reviewed, Open Access Journal (Refereed Journal). Following the discontinuation of the UGC and UGC-CARE journal listing, and in alignment with the latest UGC-CARE recommendations and guidelines, JMVRA is aligned with UGC’s Suggested Parameters for Choosing Peer-Reviewed Journals.
Helpful pages on jmvra.org
Key Terms
Subjects and search phrases this article addresses.
Related Reading
Further reading on the same theme from the JMVRA blog.
Spotting Predatory Journals: Every Red Flag in One Checklist
Read the guide RelatedRecognising a Predatory Journal
Read the guide RelatedPlagiarism Guidelines
Read the guide RelatedGetting Your Research Cited the Ethical Way
Read the guide RelatedIs This Journal Genuine? A 20-Step Authenticity Check
Read the guide RelatedSimilarity Check Service for Papers & Theses
Read the guideKeep Reading on the JMVRA Blog
This guide belongs to the JMVRA journal blog, which offers practical advice on publishing, indexing, metrics and research integrity, written to be checkable instead of promotional.