Record STMT-WC1AC26Voluntary

Publications Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Code of conduct Institutional policyWestern Europe · IEin forceNot AI-specific

This publication ethics and publication malpractice statement outlines the responsibilities of editors, reviewers, and authors for the Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies. It is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines and governs academic integrity, peer review, conflicts of interest, and open access publishing. The text ensures transparent handling of manuscripts, original research standards, and proper licensing through Creative Commons.

Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.

Who issued it

Dublin Institute of TechnologyAcademic

Lead issuer

Legal forceVoluntary

Under whose authorityInstitutional policy

Judged fromfull text

Who it governs

Researchers and academicsProfessional groupOther

Authors, reviewers, and editors participating in the Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies to understand publication standards and ethical obligations.

Sectors

Research and science · academic publishing

What the document contains

What's covered

The document covers publication ethics, malpractice policies, and the respective duties of editors, reviewers, and authors for an academic journal. It addresses peer review standards, conflict of interest disclosures, plagiarism prevention, data retention, and licensing.

What's missing

There is no mention of artificial intelligence governance, automated decision-making, algorithms, or specific technological tools.

Key takeaways

The journal evaluates manuscripts exclusively on academic merit without regard to author background.
Editors, reviewers, and authors must disclose conflicts of interest and maintain confidentiality.
Manuscripts must represent original work and undergo blind peer review by at least two experts.
Authors retain copyright and publish under a CC-BY license allowing open dissemination.
Authors must ensure raw data accessibility and handle errors or misconduct promptly through corrections or retractions.

Principles it states

Academic meritConfidentialityObjectivityOriginality

Outline

· Editors' responsibilities
· Duties of Reviewers
· Authors' duties
· Peer Review
· Fundamental errors in published works
· Permanent availability and preservation

IssuedNot recorded

Length1,308 words

FormatNot recorded

Scopenational

How it scores

Pending review

Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.

Accountability

4/5

Clear responsibility for AI outcomes

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published

Editors' responsibilities

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Dignity

0/5

Respect for the inherent worth of persons

screening score · 2026-10-23

Human Oversight

0/5

Humans remain in control of consequential decisions

screening score · 2026-10-23

Privacy

2/5

Protection of personal data and private life

provided the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Data access and retention

screening score · 2026-10-23

Transparency

3/5

Openness about how AI systems work and are used

All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

screening score · 2026-10-23

Enforcement

2/5

Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force

If the journal or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct the articles shall be removed from the journal while the allegations are investigated.

Ethics

screening score · 2026-10-23

Impact Assessment

0/5

Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use

screening score · 2026-10-23

Topics

Physical AI Governancecontext

publication_ethics peer_review academic_publishing research_integrity code_of_conduct