To protect the integrity of scholarly communication and maintain high publication standards, the Global Social Science and Humanities Journal (GSSHJ) applies a rigorous peer-review process and enforces strong ethical requirements for authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher. GSSHJ takes allegations of plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, unethical research, improper authorship, and peer-review manipulation seriously and may apply a zero-tolerance approach to proven misconduct. This policy applies to all submissions and published content, including research articles, review papers, case studies, short communications, and supplementary materials.

1) Ethical Oversight and Peer Review

• • GSSHJ uses a double-blind peer review process unless otherwise stated.

  • Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, relevance to scope, originality, rigor, clarity, and ethical compliance.

  • The journal does not tolerate manipulation of the editorial or peer-review process (e.g., fake reviewers, fabricated reviews, coercion, or paper-mill activity).

2) Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

All manuscripts are screened using Turnitin prior to peer review and may be screened again at later stages.

Plagiarism includes (but is not limited to):

• • Copying text, ideas, data, images, or tables without proper citation/permission

  • Submitting others’ work as one’s own

  • Inadequate paraphrasing that closely mirrors the source

  • “Mosaic” plagiarism (patchwork copying)

Similarity threshold: A similarity score above 13% may trigger additional editorial scrutiny, but GSSHJ does not rely on a percentage alone; the editor evaluates where the overlap occurs (methods, references, common phrases, properly quoted/cited material, etc.). Clear plagiarism may result in immediate rejection.

If plagiarism is found:

• • Before publication: the manuscript may be rejected, and authors may be sanctioned (e.g., temporary submission ban).

  • After publication: the journal may publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction depending on severity.

  • GSSHJ may notify authors’ institutions or funders when serious misconduct is confirmed.

3) Originality, Redundant Publication, and Multiple Submissions

By submitting to GSSHJ, authors confirm that:

• • The manuscript is original and not published elsewhere (in whole or substantial part).

  • The manuscript is not under review by another journal at the same time.

  • Any overlapping content (e.g., conference abstracts, theses, working papers, preprints) is clearly disclosed to the editor at submission.

Self-plagiarism / redundant publication (reusing one’s own previously published text/data without citation or without meaningful new contribution) is not acceptable.

4) Authorship and Contributor Responsibilities

Authorship should include only those who made substantial contributions to the:

• • conception/design of the work, and/or

  • data collection, analysis, interpretation, and/or

  • drafting or critically revising the manuscript, and

  • approving the final version, and

  • agreeing to be accountable for the work.

Unethical authorship practices are prohibited:

• • Gift/guest authorship (listing someone who did not contribute)

  • Ghost authorship (excluding someone who did contribute)

  • Misrepresentation of affiliations or contributions

Corresponding author responsibilities:

• • ensures all authors approve the submission and final manuscript

  • ensures accurate author order and affiliations

  • communicates with the journal on behalf of all authors

Authorship changes after submission (adding/removing/reordering authors) require:

• • written agreement from all authors, and

  • editorial approval with a clear justification.

5) Data Integrity, Reporting Standards, and Reproducibility

Authors must:

• • present research findings honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting intended to mislead.

  • describe methods transparently and report results accurately.

  • retain original data/records and provide them to the editor if requested (subject to privacy/ethics restrictions).

Data manipulation (including inappropriate image editing or altering results) is prohibited. Legitimate adjustments (e.g., brightness/contrast) must not distort meaning and should be disclosed where relevant.

Where applicable, GSSHJ encourages:

• • data availability statements

  • sharing anonymized datasets, instruments, or code (when ethically permissible)

6) Human Subjects Ethics, Consent, and Privacy

For studies involving humans (including interviews, surveys, observations, experiments, or identifiable personal data), authors must:

• • confirm that research received ethics approval from an appropriate committee or provide a clear justification where approval was not required.

  • confirm that informed consent was obtained when required.

  • protect participant privacy and confidentiality; remove identifying details unless explicit permission has been granted.

If vulnerable groups are involved (e.g., minors), authors must demonstrate enhanced protections and appropriate consent/assent procedures.

7) Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

All participants in publication (authors, reviewers, editors) must disclose conflicts that could influence judgment.

Authors must disclose:

• • financial interests, employment, consultancy, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, patents

  • personal relationships or academic rivalry

  • funding sources and the role of funders (if any)

If no conflicts exist, authors should include: “The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

8) Citation Ethics and Fair Referencing

Authors and reviewers must not engage in:

• • citation manipulation (adding irrelevant citations to inflate metrics)

  • coercive citation practices

  • misrepresentation of sources

References should be relevant, accurate, and properly formatted.

9) Use of AI-Assisted Tools

GSSHJ permits responsible use of AI tools but requires transparency and confidentiality protections.

Authors:

• • may use AI tools for language editing or formatting support.

  • must not list AI tools as authors.

  • must disclose any AI use that materially affected analysis, interpretation, or content generation (as requested by the journal).

  • remain fully responsible for accuracy, originality, and proper citation.

Reviewers:

• • must not upload manuscript content to external AI services that retain data or use it for training (unless explicitly approved by the journal).

  • may use AI only for improving the wording of their review, without sharing confidential manuscript content.

10) Responsibilities of Editors

Editors will:

• • evaluate manuscripts fairly and confidentially

  • avoid conflicts of interest and recuse themselves when necessary

  • base decisions on scholarly merit and ethical compliance, not on personal views or external pressure

  • ensure a transparent and timely review process

  • investigate ethical concerns and apply appropriate remedies (corrections, expressions of concern, retractions)

11) Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

• • treat manuscripts as confidential documents

  • declare conflicts of interest and decline reviews when conflicted

  • provide objective, respectful, and evidence-based feedback

  • identify overlooked relevant literature and possible ethical issues

  • alert the editor to suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, or data concerns

Reviewers must not:

• • use information from a manuscript for personal advantage

  • contact authors directly

  • request citations primarily to increase their own work’s visibility

12) Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

GSSHJ will correct the literature when necessary:

• • Correction (Erratum/Correction Notice): honest errors that do not invalidate findings

  • Expression of Concern: unresolved serious concerns pending investigation

  • Retraction: unreliable findings due to misconduct or major error, plagiarism, unethical research, or duplicate publication

13) Complaints and Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions if they believe:

• • a procedural error occurred, or

  • the decision was based on a factual misunderstanding, or

  • bias is credibly evidenced.

Appeals must be submitted in writing with supporting justification. GSSHJ may seek an additional independent review. The editor’s final decision after appeal is binding.