CJHP supports the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for all aspects of publication ethics. Listed below are highlights of publication ethics observed by CJHP. For further information, please visit http://publicationethics.org/resources.
1. Publication and Authorship:
Open Access Publication
All manuscripts submitted to the Californian Journal of Health Promotion (CJHP) are subject to the Open Access publishing model. In this publishing model, papers are peer-reviewed in the traditional model, under editorial control. Published papers appear electronically and are freely available from our website. Authors may also use their published CJHP .pdf’s for any non-commercial use on their personal or non-commercial institution’s website. There are no publication fees for authors. Entire articles from the CJHP website may not be reproduced, in any media or format, for commercial purpose (e.g., product support, student textbooks, etc.). However selected parts of a given article (e.g., a table of results) can be reproduced for commercial purposes if the CJHP article is cited appropriately.
Embargo Policy
When a paper is accepted for publication in the CJHP, it is not available for public release until publication on the CJHP website. Authors are permitted to present their research to their colleagues at scientific meetings, but should refrain from distributing copies of their paper, including data tables and figures, prior to official online publication. Authors are permitted to talk with reporters about their work, but should clearly disclose that the research findings may not appear elsewhere prior to publication in the CJHP.
Institutional Review Board Approval
It is imperative that original research presented in manuscripts received institutional review board (IRB) approval prior to study implementation. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that the research was conducted in such a way to minimize harm to the participants. IRB approval for study procedures should be stated in the cover letter to the Editor, as well as in the Methods section of the manuscript.
Copyrighted Material
It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that they do not include material submitted that infringes any existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
Conflicts of Interest and Financial Support
All conflicts of interest and financial support should be clearly stated in the cover letter to the Editor, and also added as an Acknowledgment in the manuscript.
Duplicate Submissions for Publication
Upon submission, authors must provide a cover letter stating that their manuscript is not currently under review or has been published in another journal. Only original, unpublished manuscripts are considered for review. Redundant manuscripts include ones that very similar in content to another manuscript that is under review, or a published article. Such manuscripts are considered unethical and will not be considered for review.
License Terms
Users can use, reuse, and build upon the material published in CJHP, even for commercial purposes, provided that the users cite the original source.
Appropriate Citing of Sources
It is the authors’ responsibility to appropriately acknowledge all sources that were used to develop the manuscript, including ideas, instruments, procedures and software utilized, and secondary data. Failure to appropriately cite sources is plagiarism.
Fraudulent Statements and Data
Purposely making inaccurate statements, and fabricating data and/or results are unethical behaviors. If discovered, they and causes for immediate rejection if the manuscript is under review, or retraction if the work is a published article.
2. Author’s responsibilities:
Contribution to the Article
All individuals who are listed as authors should have a significant intellectual contribution to the development of the publication. Such roles may include concept development (e.g., conceptualizing the study design), conducting statistical analyses, and writing portions of the article. Individuals who are involved in data collection, data entry, or other supportive activities such as may be listed in an acknowledgement, following the Discussion section.
Transparency and Objectivity
Authors of manuscripts presenting original research are obligated to present a complete and accurate description of the methods employed, so that others have the potential to replicate the work. Authors are expected to provide unbiased account of the available literature on the topic studied, and also note the limitations of their own study.
Corrections and Retractions
Authors should contact the Editor directly to correct any errors discovered in manuscripts that are in press or have already been published. Authors who discover a major inaccuracy are obligated to promptly notify the Editor and jointly determine whether the article can be corrected or should be retracted from the website.
Provision of Potential Reviewers
When submitting a manuscript for peer review, corresponding authors are encouraged to provide the contact information of potential reviewers. Potential reviewers may be colleagues who are familiar with the content of the manuscript, but had no involvement in its preparation. The Editor may directly invite the potential reviewers to participate in the peer review process. If author-recommended reviewers accept the assignment, they should not discuss the review with the authors.
Participation in the Peer Review Process
Subsequent to successful publication, authors may be invited to participate in the peer review process of other manuscripts of similar content. Upon request, the Editor will provide documentation of peer review services completed.
3. Peer review / responsibility for the reviewers:
Conflicts of Interest
During the peer review process, potential reviewers are asked to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Some potential conflicts of interest may be related to sources of funding, the research study, or their relationship to the authors. Potential reviewers who believe that their review of the manuscript may represent a conflict of interest should discuss the situation with the Editor. The potential reviewer and the Editor will determine whether a conflict of interest truly exists and decide whether the potential reviewer is able to provide a fair review. If there is any uncertainty as to whether the potential reviewer can provide a fair review, the Editor will identify an alternate potential reviewer. Assigned reviewers who discover a conflict of interest during the review process are required to contact the Editor about the situation for further discussion.
Confidentiality
Novel, unpublished information, concepts, or methodologies gleaned by reviewers through the peer review process is expected to be kept confidential. The manuscript may not be used to the reviewer’s personal advantage, and may not be shared with others until the manuscript is published.
Unbiased and Constructive feedback
Reviewers are asked to comment on the intellectual content of the paper, regardless of their personal values, political values, or pre-existing opinions regarding scientific theories or methodologies. Reviewers are asked to make their best effort to provide clear, specific, and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their manuscript, regardless of their overall opinion about its quality. It is particularly helpful when reviewers explain the rationale for the recommendations they make. Also, reviewers should take great care to not include any comments in their review that could potentially offend the authors.
Types of Feedback
Manuscript feedback may include comments that pertain to the following categories:
• The extent to which the research addresses a health-related need in a novel way.
• Methodological details clearly provided
• Relevant literature is cited
• Accuracy and appropriateness of the data analyses
• The degree to which the findings justify the stated conclusions
• Overall writing quality and organization of the manuscript
Given their areas of expertise, reviewers will provide feedback on one or more categories stated above. Reviewers are not obligated to provide feedback on categories that are outside their area of expertise.
Concerns Regarding Plagiarism
Reviewers should alert the Editor of any concerns regarding strong similarities between the manuscript being reviewed and other published articles.
4. Editorial responsibilities:
Assignment of Associate Editors and Reviewers
The Editor first screens manuscripts for fit for potential publication in CJHP. Potential manuscripts are then assigned to an Associate Editor, a member of Editorial Board with content expertise and no potential conflicts of interest. The Editor then selects 2-3 reviewers, who could be author or Associate-Editor-recommended colleagues, previous contributors to CJHP, or other experts in the field.
Manuscript Decisions
The reviewers provide their independent reviews of the manuscript, which the Associate Editor then receives. The Associate Editor arrives at a decision regarding the publication status of a manuscript, based upon reviewers’ feedback and their additional impressions after reading through the manuscript themselves. Possible decisions include accept pending minor revisions, revise and resubmit, and reject. Decisions are made independently of the Editorial Board’s personal values, political values, or pre-existing opinions. The Editor reserves the right to make the final decision. In some cases, the Editor may arrive at a decision that is different than that of the Editorial Board. The Editor will not make decisions on manuscripts where a potential conflict of interest could exist. In such cases, a Monitoring Editor will make final decisions. Revised and resubmitted manuscripts will only be considered for publication if all concerns were deemed to be appropriately addressed.
The Editor will uphold all publishing ethics issues listed below.
5. Publishing ethics issues:
Corrections and Retractions
CJHP supports the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for correction and retraction: http://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf Original articles can be corrected for minor errors and re-uploaded onto the journal’s website. Articles with larger issues of concern that were discussed earlier (e.g., potential fraudulence, etc.) may lead to the retraction of the article from the journal’s database, along with a retraction notice.
Monitoring/safeguarding Publishing Ethics
The Editor and the Editorial Board will follow legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions regarding manuscripts are based solely upon the criteria of intellectual quality, scientific merit, and suitability for the CJHP readership, not financial gain, political gain, or any other obligations. As described earlier, the Editor will not make decisions regarding manuscripts where a potential conflict of interest may exist. Rather, a Monitoring Editor with no stated conflicts of interests to the work being reviewed, will make such decisions.
If you have any questions related to the CJHP publication ethics and malpractice statement, please contact Michele Mouttapa at [email protected].
