JPE Publishing Ethics
updated on February 24th 2023, including an explicit point on "Correction / Retraction", see below
The Journal of Pollination Ecology (ASBL) (ISSN 1920-7603), founded in 2009, is a diamond open access, peer-reviewed, electronically published, international scientific journal. It is the official journal of the International Commission for Plant-Pollinator Relationships (ICPPR) and has tight relationships to SCAPE (Scandinavian Association of Pollination Ecology). It is freely available through a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. The integrity of academic content and publishing process is paramount for the Journal of Pollination Ecology (JPE). This document outlines the best practice principles that JPE applies, following the recommendations and practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
JPE upholds the expected same high standards as in academia. JPE’s principles cover honesty in all aspects of research; scrupulous care, thoroughness and excellence in research practice; transparency and open communication; care and respect for all participants in and subjects of research. Anyone who believes that research published by JPE has not been carried out in line with these Guidelines, or the above principles, should raise their concern with the editor in chief (EIC) of JPE.
Non-discrimination for Academic Research
JPE does not discriminate against authors, editors or peer reviewers based on personal characteristics or identity. Editorial decisions on articles submitted to JPE our journals are based on independent peer review reports. JPE has a policy of considering appeals of editorial decisions through the Associate Editor in charge of the submission in consultation with the EIC. JPE does not tolerate abusive behaviour or correspondence towards anyone involved in the publishing process on JPE’s behalf.
JPE is committed to editorial independence, and strives in all cases to prevent this principle from being compromised through conflicts of interest, fear, or any other corporate, business, financial or political influence, including that as may be brought forward within the broader scientific publishing industry. The Editorial Process is described on JPE’s web site.
Peer review is critical to maintaining the standards of JPE. JPE provides appropriate guidance for rigorous, fair and effective peer review. JPE encourages its editors and peer reviewers to familiarize themselves with, and act in accordance with, relevant best practice guidelines on peer review as per COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers. JPE expects those who oversee the peer review process to be able to recognize warning signs of fraudulent or manipulated peer review, and to raise any concerns to the EIC and Editorial Board. JPE will support its editors and peer reviewers in investigating and acting on any suspected cases of manipulated or fraudulent peer review. JPE will protect the confidentiality of participants in its peer review process in which anonymity is required, as is normal.
Authorship and Contributorship
JPE recommends applying the following principles to authorships, other contributions to publishing, and to acknowledgments. Authorships represents substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published; agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work assurance that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. JPE considers the corresponding author to be the person who handles the manuscript and correspondence during the publication process. JPE expects that the corresponding author confirms that he/she has authority to act on behalf of all co-authors in all matters pertaining to publication of the manuscript including supplementary material. JPE expects that the corresponding author is responsible for obtaining such agreements and for informing the co-authors of the manuscript’s status throughout the submission, review, and publication process. In addition, the corresponding author also acts as the main point of contact for any enquiries (including those relating to the integrity of the work) after the paper is published. JPE encourages authors to list anyone who does not meet the criteria for authorship in an Acknowledgments section in their publication. JPE follows COPE’s guidelines on authorship and authorship disputes. JPE expects anyone involved in editorial decisions for JPE to familiarize themselves with those resources. JPE will support its editors in dealing with authorship disputes, including escalating or seeking advice on cases with COPE. JPE keeps abreast of established and emerging industry standards to increase no- cost transparency in authorship (e.g., ORCID; Research Gate; Creative Commons). JPE also supports initiatives that enable transparency in contributorship such as CRediT taxonomy.
Academic Research Plagiarism
JPE defines plagiarism as ‘using someone else’s ideas, words, data, or other material produced by them without acknowledgement’. Plagiarism can occur in respect to all types of sources and media, including text, illustrations, material downloaded from websites or drawn from manuscripts or other media, published and unpublished material, including lectures, presentations and grey literature. JPE does not tolerate plagiarism and reserves the right to check all submissions through appropriate plagiarism checking tools. Submissions containing suspected plagiarism, in whole or part, will be rejected. If plagiarism is discovered post-publication, JPE will follow guidance outlined in the Retractions, Corrections and Expressions of Concern of COPE (see also below).
Duplicate and Redundant Publication Duplicate or redundant publication, or ‘self-plagiarism’, occurs if a work, or substantial parts of a work, is published more than once by the author(s) of the work without appropriate cross-referencing or justification for the overlap. That can be in the same or a different language. JPE does not support substantial overlap between publications except under special circumstances which should be first explored with the EIC. When authors submit manuscripts to JPE, those manuscripts should not be under consideration, accepted for publication or in press within a different journal, book or similar entity. Deposition of a preprint on the author’s personal website, in an institutional repository, or in a preprint archive shall not be viewed as prior or duplicate publication (see COPE’s definition of redundant publication).
Correction / Retraction
We expect our readers, authors, reviewers and editors to raise any suspicions of plagiarism or errors in already published articles by contacting the EIC. Depending on the severity, this will lead to correction and replacement of the PDF including a short note, or to retraction of the article. Reasons for a retraction are: double publication, plagiarism, copyright violation, unreliable data due to data fabrication or honest error, willful exclusion of a legitimate author and otherwise unethical behaviour.
JPE will not modify existing, published content nor originate new materials to meet political or ideological requirements.
Academic Research involving human beings or animals
should be approved by institutional relevant ethics committee(s) and should conform to international ethical and legal standards for research. If a submission to JPE involves such matters, authors must divulge that all ethical issues have been addressed.
Conflicts of Interest and Funding
JPE strives to ensure that it is free from undue influence. Potential conflicts of interest are situations that could be perceived to exert an undue influence on the presentation, review or publication of a piece of work. These may be financial, non-financial, professional, contractual or personal in nature. They may also include undue influence in publication venue by academic research funding agencies and other organizations involved in scientific publication. JPE asks the inclusion of funding sources in the Acknowledgements and of a statement regarding conflict of interest in the manuscript.
Freedom of expression, libel, defamation and false statements
Freedom of expression is critical to JPE as an academic publisher that does not support publishing false statements that harm the reputation of individuals, groups, other organizations, or JPE itself. JPE is founded on decency and mutual respect and reserves the right to publish instances of libel, defamation and promulgation of false statements (with or without explanations, apologies or retractions) in so far as those might influence authors, reviewers, editors or JPE itself.
Fraudulent research and research misconduct
If JPE is made aware of fraudulent research published in JPE, the EIC will work with the relevant editor(s) and other appropriate institutions or organizations, to investigate. Any publication found to include fraudulent results will be retracted, or an appropriate correction or expression of concern will be issued.
Permissions to Reproduce
According to the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License, JPE grants permissions to third-parties to reproduce, reuse or adapt its content for use in different contexts and languages but strictly in consultation with, and permission from the authors.
If allowed by the employer, funding body or others who might have an interest, JPE strongly encourages authors to 1. deposit data in a suitable repository or storage location, for sharing and further use by others; and 2. Describe, in a data availability statement where the data may be found.
JPE supports COPE’s Statement on Censorship.
Social Media and Other Communication means
are powerful tools for disseminating and engaging with JPE, for reaching new readers and for keeping content alive. JPE uses Facebook and Twitter to disseminate announcements such as new publications etc. However, JPE notes that such onward communication should never be at the expense of the integrity of the content or of the academic record nor should it cast aspersions on its authors, reviewers or editors.