Ethical Principles and Publication Policy
The Journal of Sports Science Academy (JOSSA) is committed to upholding international ethical standards in all stages of its publication process. Our journal adheres to the ethical principles established by leading organizations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Manuscripts submitted to JOSSA are evaluated in accordance with these ethical principles. All stakeholders involved in the publication process (publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers) are obligated to comply with these guidelines.
1.Ethical Principles and Responsibilities for Editors
1.1. Impartiality and Objectivity
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on their academic merit. Factors such as the authors’ identities, gender, ethnic background, religious beliefs, political views, or institutional affiliations will not influence the evaluation process.
1.2. Confidentiality
Editors are responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of all information related to the evaluation process. Manuscript data will only be shared with individuals directly involved in the process (e.g., reviewers).
1.3. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest
Editors ensure that any conflict of interest is addressed by assigning the evaluation process to an independent editor. Additionally, editors abstain from influencing the process for their manuscripts.
1.4. Management of Peer Review Process
Editors implement a double-blind peer review system and ensure the reviewers' independence. They provide guidance to ensure fair and unbiased evaluations.
1.5. Addressing Ethical Violations
Editors act promptly upon detecting plagiarism, fabrication, data manipulation, or other ethical violations. This includes initiating investigations and taking corrective actions, such as retracting or correcting the article if necessary.
1.6. Scientific Decision-Making
Publication decisions are based upon reviewer evaluations, scientific validity, and originality.
1.7. Transparent Management of Publication Processes
Editors are responsible for ensuring the transparency and clarity of the journal’s publication policies. Authors and reviewers are kept informed of process details.
2. Ethical Principles and Responsibilities for Authors
2.1. Originality and Avoidance of Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. Any excerpts from other works should be properly cited, and sources should be accurately referenced.
2.2. Proper Citation Practices
All sources must be cited fully and correctly, following citation guidelines. Omissions, inaccurate attributions, or misleading references are considered ethical violations.
2.3. Research and Publication Ethics
For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors must obtain and provide ethics committee approval documents. Details of these approvals must be explicitly stated within the methodology section.
2.4. Declaration of Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest related to their work.
2.5. Data Transparency and Accessibility
Authors are expected to retain raw data associated with their research and make them available for review by editors or reviewers if requested.
2.6. Declaration of Contributions
All individuals listed as authors must have made substantial contributions to the research. The order of authorship and allocation of responsibilities must be agreed upon prior to submission.
2.7. Corrections and Retractions
If a significant error is identified in a published article, authors are obligated to notify the editors and cooperate in issuing a correction or retraction.
3. Ethical Principles and Responsibilities for Reviewers
3.1. Impartiality and Scientific Approach
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts solely based on their academic merit. Factors such as the authors’ identities or institutional affiliations must not influence the evaluation.
3.2. Confidentiality
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of all information related to the review process and refrain from discussing manuscripts with third parties.
3.4. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must inform the journal of any conflict of interest and decline to review the manuscript if such a conflict exists.
3.5. Timely and Comprehensive Review
Reviewers are expected to complete their evaluations within the specified time frame. Their assessments should be constructive, detailed, and grounded in scientific reasoning.
3.6. Reporting Ethical Concerns
Reviewers must alert the editor to any ethical violations (e.g., plagiarism or data manipulation) they detect in the manuscript.
4. Procedures for Addressing Ethical Violations
4.1. Detection and Response
In cases of suspected ethical violations, investigations are initiated in accordance with COPE guidelines. If a violation is confirmed:
- The manuscript is rejected.
- If published, a retraction process is initiated.
- Relevant institutions may be notified if necessary.
4.2. Corrections and Retractions
When errors are identified in a published article:
- Minor issues are addressed with a correction notice.
- Significant issues result in retraction, and readers are informed accordingly.
5. Publisher Principles and Responsibilities
5.1. Transparency and Independence
The publisher guarantees impartiality and editorial independence throughout all publication processes. Editorial decisions are not influenced by the publisher.
5.2. Open Access and Licensing
All articles are published as open access under the CC BY-NC-ND license.
5.3. Timely Publication
The publisher is committed to ensuring timely publication of issues and making them accessible to readers.
5.4. Research Ethics and Intellectual Property
The publisher ensures that all ethical and legal requirements for human and animal research are fulfilled. Intellectual property rights and copyrights are strictly protected.
