Publication Ethics

The Editor/s is required to act in a fair, balanced, objective manner and no discrimination of any sort is permitted or acceptable in any form or shape.All articles are required to considered if they align with the scope of the journal and are accepted solely on their academic merit and without commercial influence, after double blind peer review. All authors have a reasonable opportunity to respond to any complaints.

Reviewers are appointed based on their expertise, to contribute to the decision-making process, thereby assist in improving the quality of the published article by reviewing the manuscript objectively and timeously. Reviewers are to maintain the confidentiality of any information supplied by the editor or author and may not retain or copy the manuscript in any way for any reason.The reviewers are expected to alert the editor or managing editor of any published or submitted content that is significantly similar to that under current review. Reviewers must state any concerns about conflicts of interest and alert the editor to these, if necessary withdrawing their services for reviewing a particular manuscript, which for example be from the same institution as the one in which they are employed

The Author/s are required to retain accurate records of data associated with their submitted manuscript, supply or provide access to any data referred to in an article, if requested request to do so. No article submitted may be under consideration or accepted for publication anywhere else. All sources must be cited accurately. The author/s must confirm that all the work in a submitted manuscript is original in nature and to acknowledge and cite content reproduced from other sources used. They also need to acquire permission to replicate any content from other sources. Authors must ensure that any studies involving human or animal subjects conforms to national, local and institutional laws and requirements (e.g. WMA Declaration of Helsinki,) and confirm that approval has been sought and obtained where appropriate from university research ethics committees or other legal bodies. Authors must ensure that the well-being, safety and protection of persons involved in the research, where applicable, is of primary concern. Potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed. Where errors may occur in publication, the author/s should notify the editor and necessary revisions will be made and an erratum published. Where deemed necessary, an article may be retracted.

Misconduct and unethical behaviour, if and when identified, must be brought to the attention of the editor and publisher. Minor misconduct will be dealt with rapidly and a ‘guilty’ party can respond electronically to establish their case in a collegial fashion. Any informant should also be collegial and provide sufficient information and evidence of error or intentional oversight, in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations are taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached. Evidence must be presented and no allegations will be made beyond those who need to know. The editor may consult with experts for advice and his/her decision will be binding. Where there has been misconduct, there will be a formal notice detailing the misconduct and the outcome thereof. ​
NOTE THAT THE USE OF AI IS PROHIBITED. IF USED IN EXTREME CASES IT MUST BE EXPLAINED WHY AND HOW.

Text changes after a proof layout issue

Authors are given the opportunity to revise and approve the text of the accepted manuscript in the final phase of copy-editing and are sent a proof to check. After the author checks and resends the work it is then considered as approved by him or her. The author must thus carefully proofread the final proof galleys. Proofreading is intended to correct any typesetting mistakes and may not be used to bring in any new changes.

 

Cautionary
Authorship
Inclusion/s of a person/s who were not involved in the writing of a manuscript is a violation of publication ethics.
Plagiarism
Submitted manuscripts must be the original works of the author(s). This why we require a plagiarism report such as Turnitin for each manuscript.
Duplicate Manuscript

It is highly unethical for authors to submit a manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. This includes the submission of any manuscripts derived from the same data in such a manner that there are clearly no substantial differences in the submission. Submitting the same article in a different languages to another journal is also unethical.

Fabrication / Falsification of Data

Fabrication, manipulation or falsification of data is a severe violation of publication ethics. Where there is suspicion of  false or fabricated data, legal steps may be taken against authors.
Citation Manipulation

Only articles/sources relevant to the article must be cited.
Data Protection

In terms of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA or the Act), No. 4 of 2013, for an author/s submitting a manuscript to us for reviewing for our publications, we require name, email address, Orcid ID (Where applicable), institutional affiliation and country. These are used for the regular operations of a publication. The publication and the publisher recognize the importance of protecting the personal information collected from users in the operation of article publication, and have practices in place to ensure that steps are taken to maintain the security, integrity, and privacy of the personal data collected and processed. Where quantitative data has been collected, and in some cases qualitative or mixed methodology data, (unless totally conceptual desktop research) an ethical clearance attainment statement from institutions must be stated in the article by the author/s. All details on record are destroyed after 3 years. Except of course for what appears on the online article.

Retractions
Any retracted article will be identified and linked to a relevant article and published promptly to avoid and limit any detrimental effects. Who retracts the article and the reason and objective/s for this will be also be explained where relevant.

 

NSEF Code of Best Practice:

- The reported findings and/or conceptual insights must be original, in the sense that they are novel findings or insights that are not published elsewhere.

-Any paper submitted to a journal should only be considered for possible publication if the author(s) have certified that the paper in question is not under consideration by another publication, and will not be submitted to any other journal until a final rejection decision (or formal withdrawal) from the resent journal has been received.

-Manuscripts must contain, or permit reference in sufficient detail, of the methods and materials used in the study (where applicable) in order to make explicit how the
knowledge was generated, and the academic basis for the claims being made.

-Integrity of scholarship requires that no apparently inconsistent data are omitted.

-The statistical treatment of data must be thorough and the conclusions reasonable, and based on the results of the research and objectives.

-The existing relevant literature must be appropriately and fairly cited, and self-citation must be limited; in this respect, efforts should be made to ensure that reference is made to the first report of a finding or conceptual insight, if possible, rather than a later citation with reference to subsequent work.
-Authorship must conform to the notions of responsibility and credit; thus special attention must be given to the first ‘lead’ author (sometimes explicitly shared), and the inclusion in the authorship listing only of persons who have made a significant contribution to the production of the work at an intellectual, practical or conceptual level. Speculative decisions and statements must be clearly specified as such and kept to a minimum (except where the nature of the contribution requires speculation, such as philosophical articles, case discussions, theology, etc.).

-Acknowledgement of funding sources and possible conflicts of interest must be stated.

-Author affiliations should be provided which reflect both the period of the study and the present situation.

-Priority is given from the date of acceptance of an article (i.e. once the peer review has already taken place), not from its date of receipt. However both dates are always provided in the published version.

-Post-publication errors and falsifications must always be corrected and/or retracted in a later issue of the same journal by means of an erratum or a retraction notice
which should be published on the article HTML/website page as well as the PDF.