Publication Ethics

SocioLumen is committed to maintaining integrity, transparency, impartiality, and accountability throughout the publication process. The journal’s ethical policies are informed by the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These principles apply to authors, editors, reviewers, and all parties involved in publication.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must:

Submit original work that has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere.
Present research findings accurately and refrain from fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, and misleading reporting.
Cite all sources appropriately and obtain permission for copyrighted materials where required.
Retain research data and provide supporting data to the editors when reasonably requested.
Disclose all sources of funding, institutional support, and potential conflicts of interest.
Ensure that all listed authors have made a genuine scholarly contribution and approved the submitted version.
Inform the editorial office promptly if a significant error is discovered during evaluation or after publication.

Simultaneous submission, duplicate publication, redundant publication, ghost authorship, honorary authorship, and undisclosed manipulation of data or images are unacceptable.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the study; participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript; approved the final version; and agreed to be accountable for the work.

Contributors who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their permission. Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be supported by a written explanation and the approval of all authors. Changes after acceptance will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Ethical Approval and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants, personal or sensitive data, surveys, interviews, observations, experiments, or vulnerable groups must comply with applicable legislation and institutional ethical standards.

Where ethical approval is required, the name of the ethics committee, approval date, and decision number must be stated in the manuscript. Informed consent and permission to publish identifiable information must be obtained where applicable. If ethical approval is not required, authors may be asked to provide a reasoned statement explaining the exemption.

Plagiarism and Smilarity Policy

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are screened using reliable similarity-detection software before peer review. Excluding the reference list, properly cited direct quotations, and unavoidable technical expressions, the overall similarity rate of a manuscript must not exceed 15%.

The similarity score alone is not sufficient to determine plagiarism. Editors also evaluate the sources, nature, extent, context, and distribution of the identified similarities. Unattributed copying may result in rejection even when the overall similarity rate is below 15%. Manuscripts exceeding the 15% threshold may be returned to the authors for revision or rejected depending on the nature of the overlap.

Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, uncredited translation, inappropriate paraphrasing, and unauthorized reuse of text, data, figures, or ideas are not acceptable.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, institutional, professional, personal, or intellectual interests that could influence—or reasonably appear to influence—the publication process.

Funding sources and the role of funders in the study must be clearly stated. The absence of funding or conflicts of interest should also be declared.

Use of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the integrity of scholarly work. Authors must transparently disclose any substantive use of generative artificial intelligence in writing, translation, analysis, coding, visual production, or other stages of the research.

The disclosure should identify the tool and explain how it was used. Authors remain fully responsible for verifying the accuracy, originality, confidentiality, citations, and legal compliance of all content.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors must:

Make decisions based on scholarly merit, relevance, originality, methodological quality, and ethical compliance.
Act independently and impartially, without discrimination based on nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political belief, institutional affiliation, or personal characteristics.
Protect the confidentiality of manuscripts, authors, and reviewers.
Disclose conflicts of interest and withdraw from handling manuscripts where impartiality may be compromised.
Avoid using unpublished material for personal research or advantage.
Investigate credible allegations of misconduct before or after publication.
Ensure that corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions are issued when necessary.

A manuscript submitted by an editor or editorial board member must be handled independently by an editor without a conflict of interest.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

Evaluate manuscripts objectively, constructively, and within the agreed period.
Treat manuscripts and review reports as confidential.
Decline the invitation if they lack relevant expertise or cannot complete the review impartially.
Disclose any potential conflict of interest.
Identify relevant uncited work where possible.
Refrain from using unpublished information or ideas for personal benefit.
Avoid offensive, personal, discriminatory, or unsupported comments.

Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or confidential information to generative artificial intelligence systems or other unauthorized third-party services.

Research Misconduct

Allegations concerning plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, unethical research, authorship disputes, peer-review manipulation, or other misconduct will be examined fairly and confidentially.

The editors may request explanations, original data, ethical documents, or other evidence. Where necessary, the journal may contact authors’ institutions, funding bodies, other journals, or relevant authorities. Appropriate action may include rejection, suspension of evaluation, correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Corrections and Retractions

Errors that do not invalidate the main findings may be addressed through a published correction. Where serious concerns remain unresolved, an expression of concern may be issued.

An article may be retracted when its findings are unreliable because of major error or misconduct, it constitutes plagiarism or redundant publication, reports unethical research, or seriously compromises the scholarly record. Retraction notices will state the reason and remain linked to the original article. The published record will be preserved transparently.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors and readers may submit reasoned complaints or appeals through the official contact information provided on the journal website. Appeals must explain the grounds for reconsideration and provide relevant evidence.

Complaints and appeals will be evaluated objectively and, where possible, by an editor or authorized person who was not directly involved in the disputed decision. An appeal does not guarantee that the editorial decision will be changed.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are independent of commercial, political, institutional, or personal influence. Advertising, sponsorship, author fees, or other financial considerations do not affect editorial decisions.

Publication Ethics