Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Pinagpala Publishing Services (PPS) is a registered publisher under the National Book Development Board (NBDB) of the Philippines, as mandated by Republic Act 8047, also known as the Book Publishing Industry Development Act. This law established the NBDB to develop and implement a National Book Policy and a corresponding National Book Development Plan aimed at fostering the growth and sustainability of the Philippine book publishing industry.

As part of its commitment to ethical publishing practices, PPS adheres to the highest standards of integrity and transparency in all aspects of the publication process. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to follow established best-practice guidelines on ethical behavior, as outlined below:

Duties of Editors

1. Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts solely based on academic merit, including their importance, originality, validity, and relevance to the publication's scope. Decisions to edit and publish manuscripts are made independently, without influence from the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, citizenship, religious beliefs, political ideologies, or institutional affiliations.

The Editor-in-Chief holds full authority over the editorial content of the publication and determines the timing of its release. Editorial decisions are not influenced by external agencies or government policies.

2. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must ensure that all information related to submitted manuscripts remains confidential. Such information will only be shared with the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as necessary.

3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and editorial board members must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for their personal research without explicit written consent from the authors. Any privileged information or ideas obtained during the review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal advantage.

If an editor has a conflict of interest due to any personal, professional, or financial relationship with the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript, they must recuse themselves from the review process and delegate the manuscript to another editor.

4. Publication Decisions

All submitted manuscripts undergo a rigorous peer-review process by at least two subject matter experts. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on whether to publish a manuscript, based on the reviewers' recommendations, the importance of the work to readers and researchers, and adherence to legal and ethical standards, including those related to libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

5. Investigating Ethical Concerns

In collaboration with the publisher, editors will take necessary actions when ethical concerns arise regarding a submitted or published manuscript. Any allegations of misconduct will be thoroughly investigated, regardless of when they are reported. If the concerns are substantiated, appropriate actions such as corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern will be published. PPS editors adhere to the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Flowcharts when addressing cases of suspected misconduct.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers play a critical role in the editorial process by providing objective and constructive feedback to help editors make informed publication decisions. Their evaluations also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

2. Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or are unable to complete the review promptly must notify the editors immediately and decline the review invitation to avoid delays in the process.

3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts sent for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared or discussed with others unless explicitly authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.

4. Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

Reviews should be conducted impartially, with observations and feedback clearly stated and supported by logical arguments. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate and unprofessional.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers must ensure that authors have properly cited all relevant sources and notify editors of any significant similarities or overlaps between the submitted manuscript and other known works.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest (financial, personal, or professional) that could influence their evaluation of the manuscript. If such conflicts exist, reviewers should decline the invitation to review. Unpublished material from the manuscript must not be used for personal research without the explicit consent of the authors.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards

Authors should present accurate, objective, and comprehensive accounts of their research, including sufficient details and references to allow replication. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.

2. Data Access and Retention

Authors may be required to provide raw data for editorial review and should ensure that data is accessible to other professionals for at least 10 years after publication, provided confidentiality and legal rights are maintained.

3. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original and that all sources are properly cited. Plagiarism in any form, including copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work without attribution, is strictly prohibited.

4. Multiple or Redundant Submissions

Manuscripts submitted to PPS must not have been published or submitted elsewhere. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple publications simultaneously is considered unethical.

5. Authorship Criteria

Only individuals who have made significant contributions to the research and writing process should be listed as authors. All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission for publication. Contributions that do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section with the contributors’ consent.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could influence the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support must also be disclosed.

7. Ethics Approval and Informed Consent

For studies involving human or animal subjects, authors must confirm compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines. Informed consent must be obtained from human participants, and their privacy rights must always be respected.

8. Peer Review Participation

Authors are expected to participate in the peer-review process and respond promptly to requests for revisions, clarifications, or additional data.

9. Corrections and Retractions

If authors discover significant errors in their published work, they must immediately notify the editors and cooperate to issue corrections or retract the paper if necessary.

Duties of the Publisher

1. Handling Ethical Issues

In cases of suspected or proven misconduct (e.g., plagiarism or fraudulent publication), the publisher, in collaboration with editors, will take appropriate measures to investigate and resolve the issue. This may include issuing corrections, retractions, or other relevant notices.

2. Ensuring Content Accessibility

PPS is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research. To ensure accessibility, PPS partners with reputable organizations and maintains a robust digital archive system.

By adhering to these ethical guidelines, Pinagpala Publishing Services ensures the integrity, quality, and transparency of its publishing process while fostering trust among authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. For more details or inquiries, please contact pinagpalapublishingservices@gmail.com.