Publication Ethics Policy

Commitment to Ethical Publishing

The International Review of FinTech Business and Management (IRFBM), published by the Academy of Decision and Data Sciences (ADDS), is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, fairness, and responsible scholarly communication.

The journal follows internationally recognised principles of publication ethics, including the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These principles apply to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and all individuals involved in the publication process.

This policy explains the ethical responsibilities of all parties and the procedures used by IRFBM to address concerns relating to authorship, originality, peer review, conflicts of interest, research data, artificial intelligence, and publication misconduct.

Research and Publication Integrity

All manuscripts submitted to IRFBM must represent original, honest, and academically meaningful research.

A submitted manuscript must:

  • Fall within the journal’s aims and scope.

  • Present original scholarly work.

  • Be based on reliable evidence and appropriate research methods.

  • Not be under review by another journal.

  • Not have been published previously in substantially the same form.

  • Be free from plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, defamation, and unlawful content.

  • Comply with relevant ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.

  • Provide proper acknowledgement of all sources, contributors, datasets, and funding.

Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to use copyrighted or confidential third-party material.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based solely on:

  • Academic quality.

  • Originality.

  • Relevance to the journal.

  • Methodological strength.

  • Reliability of evidence.

  • Ethical compliance.

  • Contribution to knowledge.

Decisions must not be influenced by an author’s nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, ethnicity, political views, financial position, professional status, or personal relationships.

The publisher does not interfere with the academic judgement of the Editor-in-Chief or appointed editors.

Editorial Endogeny

IRFBM seeks to avoid excessive publication of articles written by its own editors, editorial board members, or regular reviewers.

Articles authored or co-authored by individuals directly connected with the journal will be subject to the same editorial and peer review standards as all other submissions.

Such manuscripts will be handled by an independent editor who has no conflict of interest with the authors. The involved editor or board member will not participate in reviewer selection, editorial discussion, or the final decision.

The journal aims to ensure that articles authored or co-authored by editors, editorial board members, or listed reviewers do not exceed 25% of the research content published across the two most recent issues.

Authorship Criteria

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the research.

Each listed author should have:

  • Contributed significantly to the research conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation.

  • Participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript.

  • Approved the final version submitted for publication.

  • Agreed to be accountable for the accuracy and integrity of the work.

Individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.

Unacceptable Authorship Practices

IRFBM does not permit:

  • Ghost authorship, where a substantial contributor is not listed.

  • Guest authorship, where an individual is included without meaningful contribution.

  • Honorary authorship, where authorship is granted because of position, status, or authority.

  • Gift authorship, where authorship is offered as a favour.

  • Changes to authorship without the agreement of all authors.

Artificial intelligence tools and large language models cannot be named as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work, approve the final manuscript, or respond to ethical concerns.

Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must include:

  • A clear explanation of the requested change.

  • Written agreement from all listed and affected authors.

  • Confirmation from the corresponding author.

After acceptance, authorship changes will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Disputed authorship matters may be referred to the authors’ institutions because the journal cannot independently determine individual research contributions where evidence is contested.

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author is responsible for:

  • Confirming that all authors meet the authorship criteria.

  • Obtaining approval from all authors before submission.

  • Ensuring the accuracy of author names and affiliations.

  • Managing communication with the journal.

  • Coordinating responses to reviewer and editor comments.

  • Disclosing conflicts of interest and funding.

  • Informing all authors of editorial decisions.

  • Reporting significant errors discovered after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must submit original work and properly acknowledge all material drawn from other sources.

Plagiarism includes:

  • Copying text without citation.

  • Presenting another person’s ideas, data, figures, or findings as original.

  • Closely paraphrasing published material without acknowledgement.

  • Translating published work without citation.

  • Reusing protected material without permission.

  • Presenting unpublished material belonging to another researcher without consent.

All submissions may be screened using recognised similarity detection software before or during peer review.

Confirmed plagiarism may result in rejection, correction, retraction, institutional notification, or other appropriate action.

Self-Plagiarism and Text Recycling

Authors must not reuse substantial parts of their own previously published work without citation and disclosure.

Acceptable limited reuse may include:

  • Standard methodological descriptions.

  • Properly cited definitions.

  • Material from a thesis or preprint where transparently disclosed.

  • Earlier work that is clearly referenced and meaningfully extended.

Substantial duplication, redundant publication, and undisclosed text recycling are treated as publication misconduct.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Manuscripts submitted to IRFBM must not be under consideration elsewhere.

Authors must not:

  • Submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time.

  • Publish substantially the same study more than once without proper disclosure.

  • Divide one study into several minimally different papers solely to increase publication output.

  • Present previously published findings as new.

Where a manuscript is based on a conference paper, working paper, thesis, preprint, or earlier report, the previous version must be disclosed and cited.

Citation and Attribution

Authors must provide accurate, relevant, and balanced references.

All sources that influenced the research should be appropriately acknowledged, including:

  • Journal articles.

  • Books.

  • Reports.

  • Conference papers.

  • Preprints.

  • Working papers.

  • Theses.

  • Presentations.

  • Public datasets.

  • Software.

  • Online research materials.

References should follow the citation style specified in the journal’s author guidelines.

Authors are responsible for checking the accuracy and completeness of all references.

Citation Manipulation

IRFBM prohibits citation practices intended to artificially increase citation counts or journal metrics.

Unethical citation practices include:

  • Excessive self-citation without scholarly relevance.

  • Requiring authors to cite unrelated articles.

  • Reviewer requests for citations that primarily benefit the reviewer.

  • Editors pressuring authors to cite the journal unnecessarily.

  • Citation exchanges between authors, editors, or journals.

  • Adding references solely to influence performance indicators.

Reviewers and editors should recommend additional references only when they are directly relevant to the manuscript.

Confirmed citation manipulation may result in rejection, removal from editorial roles, reviewer suspension, or institutional notification.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, alter, or selectively report research data.

Misconduct includes:

  • Inventing respondents, interviews, observations, or results.

  • Manipulating datasets to produce preferred findings.

  • Removing inconvenient observations without justification.

  • Altering statistical results.

  • Misrepresenting the research design.

  • Presenting simulated data as genuine without disclosure.

  • Concealing material errors in the analysis.

The journal may request raw data, questionnaires, coding files, ethical approvals, consent documents, or analysis outputs where concerns arise.

Failure to provide reasonable supporting evidence may affect the editorial decision.

Image, Figure, and Table Integrity

Figures, tables, charts, screenshots, and images must accurately represent the underlying evidence.

Adjustments to images are permitted only when they:

  • Apply consistently to the entire image.

  • Improve visibility without changing interpretation.

  • Do not hide, add, remove, or misrepresent information.

Authors must disclose any material image processing.

Improper image manipulation may result in rejection, correction, retraction, or investigation.

Data Availability and Transparency

Authors should preserve research data and supporting materials for a reasonable period after publication.

Where legal, ethical, and confidentiality conditions permit, authors are encouraged to provide access to:

  • Anonymised datasets.

  • Survey instruments.

  • Interview protocols.

  • Statistical code.

  • Model specifications.

  • Supplementary analyses.

  • Replication materials.

Any restriction on data access should be explained in the manuscript.

Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, personal information, interviews, surveys, experiments, or sensitive records must comply with applicable ethical and legal requirements.

The manuscript should state:

  • The name of the ethics committee or institutional review board.

  • The approval or reference number, where available.

  • Whether informed consent was obtained.

  • How participant privacy and confidentiality were protected.

  • Any exemption from ethical review and the reason for that exemption.

Manuscripts lacking necessary ethical information may be returned, rejected, or investigated.

Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international standards.

Authors must provide:

  • The name of the approving ethics body.

  • The approval number, where applicable.

  • A statement explaining how animal welfare requirements were followed.

  • Justification for the research procedures.

Informed Consent

Authors must obtain informed consent from research participants where required.

Participants should be informed about:

  • The purpose of the research.

  • Their voluntary participation.

  • Their right to withdraw.

  • How their information will be used.

  • Any foreseeable risks.

  • Confidentiality and data protection arrangements.

Consent procedures should be described in the manuscript.

Consent for Publication

Separate consent for publication may be required where an article contains identifiable personal information, including:

  • Photographs.

  • Medical or personal histories.

  • Case descriptions.

  • Direct quotations.

  • Videos or audio recordings.

  • Information that could identify an individual or organisation.

Authors must ensure that the individual concerned understands how the information will be published and accessed.

Privacy and Confidentiality

Authors must protect confidential and personally identifiable information.

Research data should be anonymised or de-identified unless:

  • Identification is essential to the research.

  • The participant has given informed consent.

  • Publication is legally and ethically permitted.

Editors and reviewers must also protect confidential manuscript information throughout the review process.

Third-Party Data and Materials

Authors using third-party datasets, figures, scales, questionnaires, images, or copyrighted materials must confirm that:

  • The material is publicly available under appropriate terms.

  • Permission has been obtained where required.

  • The source has been properly acknowledged.

  • Any licence or access conditions have been followed.

  • Confidential or restricted data have been used lawfully.

The journal may request evidence of permission before publication.

Conflicts of Interest

All authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose relationships that could influence, or reasonably appear to influence, their judgement.

Conflicts may include:

  • Financial interests.

  • Employment.

  • Consultancy.

  • Share ownership.

  • Grants or sponsorship.

  • Patent interests.

  • Institutional relationships.

  • Personal relationships.

  • Academic competition.

  • Previous research collaboration.

  • Current or former editorial roles.

Disclosure of a conflict does not automatically prevent publication. However, failure to disclose a relevant conflict may lead to rejection, correction, investigation, or retraction.

Funding Disclosure

Authors must identify all sources of financial or institutional support.

The funding statement should include:

  • Name of the funding organisation.

  • Grant or project number, where applicable.

  • Role of the funder in the research.

  • Whether the funder influenced study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, or publication.

Where no external funding was received, authors should state this clearly.

Defamation, Libel, and Unlawful Content

Manuscripts must not contain defamatory, false, discriminatory, unlawful, or unjustifiably damaging statements about identifiable persons, institutions, businesses, or organisations.

Authors are responsible for:

  • Verifying factual claims.

  • Using evidence-based language.

  • Avoiding unsupported accusations.

  • Obtaining permission where confidential or identifiable information is included.

  • Respecting privacy, intellectual property, and legal rights.

Potentially defamatory content may be removed, rejected, corrected, retracted, or referred for legal review.

Use of Artificial Intelligence by Authors

Authors remain fully responsible for every part of the submitted manuscript, including material prepared with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools.

Artificial intelligence tools must not be listed as authors.

Authors must not use generative artificial intelligence to:

  • Fabricate data.

  • Invent references.

  • Create false evidence.

  • Produce misleading results.

  • Replace the author’s intellectual judgement.

  • Generate conclusions unsupported by the research.

  • create or modify images in a way that misrepresents research evidence.

Limited use of artificial intelligence tools for language improvement, spelling, grammar, translation, coding assistance, or data analysis may be permitted where appropriate.

Material use of such tools must be disclosed in the manuscript, including:

  • The name of the tool.

  • The purpose for which it was used.

  • The part of the research or manuscript affected.

  • How the output was checked and verified.

Authors remain responsible for accuracy, originality, confidentiality, citations, and compliance with this policy.

Artificial Intelligence in Peer Review

Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents.

Reviewers and editors must not upload manuscripts, figures, datasets, supplementary files, or confidential correspondence into public or external artificial intelligence systems where this could compromise:

  • Author confidentiality.

  • Intellectual property.

  • Data protection.

  • Research secrecy.

  • Editorial independence.

Peer review reports must reflect the reviewer’s own independent academic judgement.

Artificial intelligence must not be used to replace expert evaluation or produce a review without careful human assessment.

Any permitted use of a secure editorial tool must comply with the journal’s confidentiality and data protection requirements.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must:

  • Evaluate manuscripts fairly and objectively.

  • Maintain confidentiality.

  • Declare conflicts of interest.

  • Review only within their area of competence.

  • Provide constructive and evidence-based comments.

  • Avoid personal criticism.

  • Complete reviews within the agreed period.

  • Report suspected misconduct to the editor.

  • Avoid using unpublished material for personal benefit.

  • Refrain from coercive citation practices.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly regarding a manuscript.

Editor Responsibilities

Editors must:

  • Make decisions based on scholarly merit.

  • Protect author and reviewer confidentiality.

  • Select qualified and independent reviewers.

  • Manage conflicts of interest.

  • Treat authors fairly.

  • Avoid discriminatory decision-making.

  • Investigate credible ethical concerns.

  • Correct the scholarly record where required.

  • Recuse themselves from manuscripts in which they have a conflict.

The Editor-in-Chief has final responsibility for editorial decisions.

Peer Review Manipulation

IRFBM prohibits any attempt to manipulate the peer review process.

Examples include:

  • Providing false reviewer names.

  • Creating fabricated reviewer accounts.

  • Supplying email addresses controlled by the authors.

  • Coordinating fraudulent reviews.

  • Influencing reviewers improperly.

  • Concealing relationships between authors and suggested reviewers.

  • Interfering with editorial systems.

Confirmed peer review manipulation may result in immediate rejection, retraction, reviewer removal, or notification of relevant institutions.

Confidentiality of Peer Review

Manuscripts, review reports, editorial correspondence, and decisions must be treated as confidential.

Editors and reviewers must not:

  • Share manuscript content without authorisation.

  • Discuss unpublished research publicly.

  • Use ideas or data from a manuscript for personal benefit.

  • Reveal reviewer identities.

  • Retain confidential files unnecessarily after review.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, and readers may submit complaints concerning:

  • Editorial procedures.

  • Peer review conduct.

  • Conflicts of interest.

  • Ethical concerns.

  • Publication decisions.

  • Post-publication actions.

Appeals against editorial decisions must:

  • Be submitted in writing.

  • Identify the manuscript or article.

  • Explain the grounds for appeal.

  • Provide evidence of a material error or procedural concern.

  • Avoid merely repeating arguments already considered.

An appeal does not guarantee reconsideration or acceptance.

Where appropriate, the matter may be reviewed by an editor who was not involved in the original decision.

Handling Allegations of Misconduct

All credible allegations are assessed confidentially and without unnecessary delay.

The journal may:

  • Request an explanation from the authors.

  • Examine similarity reports, data, or supporting documents.

  • Consult independent experts.

  • Contact the author’s institution or funding body.

  • Suspend review or publication while an inquiry is conducted.

  • Issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

  • Reject or withdraw the manuscript.

  • Restrict future submissions in serious cases.

The person or group accused of misconduct will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

Malicious, knowingly false, or unsupported allegations may be dismissed and may themselves be treated as unethical conduct.

Post-Publication Ethical Concerns

Ethical responsibilities continue after publication.

When reliable concerns are raised about a published article, IRFBM may:

  • Conduct an investigation.

  • Request data or documentation.

  • Publish a correction.

  • Issue an expression of concern.

  • Retract the article.

  • Notify relevant institutions or databases.

  • Update the publication record.

Published articles will normally remain accessible with an appropriate notice to preserve the transparency of the scholarly record.

Sanctions

Depending on the seriousness of misconduct, the journal may impose one or more of the following measures:

  • Formal warning.

  • Manuscript rejection.

  • Withdrawal of acceptance.

  • Publication of a correction.

  • Publication of an expression of concern.

  • Retraction.

  • Temporary restriction on future submissions.

  • Removal from reviewer or editorial roles.

  • Notification of institutions, employers, or funding organisations.

  • Notification of indexing and abstracting services.

Sanctions will be proportionate to the evidence and seriousness of the conduct.

Contact

Questions, complaints, appeals, or reports concerning publication ethics may be directed to:

International Review of FinTech Business and Management (IRFBM)
Academy of Decision and Data Sciences (ADDS)
Email: editor.irfbm@addsacademy.com

Reports should include sufficient information and supporting evidence to permit a fair assessment.

Policy Review

This policy is reviewed periodically to reflect developments in research ethics, artificial intelligence, peer review practices, legal requirements, and international scholarly publishing standards.

Any significant revision will be published clearly on the journal website.