Boston Research Journals

Effective Date: 21st January 2017
Last Updated: 09th August 2020

1. Introduction

Boston Research Journals (BRJ) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and integrity. This Publication Malpractice Statement outlines our policies and procedures for identifying, investigating, and addressing various forms of publication misconduct. Our commitment extends to all stakeholders including authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and the broader academic community.

2. Scope and Application

This statement applies to all journals published by Boston Research Journals and covers all forms of publication malpractice including but not limited to plagiarism, data falsification, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, and peer review manipulation.

3. Types of Publication Malpractice

3.1 Plagiarism

  • Definition: The appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit
  • Scope: Includes text plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and idea plagiarism
  • Detection: All submissions undergo plagiarism screening using advanced detection software

3.2 Data Falsification and Fabrication

  • Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results
  • Fabrication: Making up data or results and recording or reporting them

3.3 Duplicate and Redundant Publication

  • Duplicate Publication: Publishing the same study in multiple journals
  • Redundant Publication: Publishing papers that overlap substantially with previously published work

3.4 Authorship Issues

  • Ghost Authorship: Failure to acknowledge significant contributors
  • Honorary Authorship: Including authors who have not made substantial contributions
  • Authorship Disputes: Conflicts regarding author order or inclusion

3.5 Peer Review Manipulation

  • Reviewer Suggestion Manipulation: Suggesting reviewers with conflicts of interest
  • Review Fabrication: Creating fake reviewer accounts or reviews
  • Reviewer Misconduct: Breach of confidentiality or bias in peer review

3.6 Citation Manipulation

  • Excessive Self-Citation: Inappropriate citation of one’s own work
  • Citation Stacking: Coordinated efforts to artificially inflate citation counts
  • Coercive Citation: Pressuring authors to cite specific works

4. Roles and Responsibilities

4.1 Editorial Team

  • Maintain awareness of publication ethics guidelines
  • Implement robust peer review processes
  • Investigate allegations of misconduct promptly and fairly
  • Take appropriate corrective actions when misconduct is confirmed

4.2 Authors

  • Ensure originality and accuracy of submitted work
  • Disclose all conflicts of interest
  • Provide proper attribution and citations
  • Comply with authorship criteria and obtain consent from all co-authors

4.3 Reviewers

  • Maintain confidentiality of the review process
  • Declare conflicts of interest
  • Provide honest, constructive, and timely reviews
  • Report suspected misconduct to editors

4.4 Publishers

  • Support editorial independence
  • Provide resources for ethics training and misconduct investigation
  • Ensure transparency in publication processes

5. Investigation Procedures

5.1 Initial Assessment

  • All allegations of misconduct will be acknowledged within 48 hours
  • Preliminary assessment conducted within 7 days
  • Decision on formal investigation made within 14 days

5.2 Formal Investigation Process

  • Independent investigation committee established for serious cases
  • All parties provided opportunity to respond
  • Investigation completed within 60 days of initiation
  • Findings documented and communicated to relevant parties

5.3 Confidentiality

  • All investigations conducted with strict confidentiality
  • Information shared only with individuals directly involved in the investigation
  • Anonymity of whistleblowers protected where possible

6. Sanctions and Corrective Actions

6.1 Minor Violations

  • Editorial guidance and education
  • Requirement for author training
  • Correction or clarification notices

6.2 Moderate Violations

  • Formal warning letters
  • Temporary suspension from submitting to BRJ journals
  • Publication of correction or retraction notices

6.3 Serious Violations

  • Permanent ban from submitting to BRJ journals
  • Notification to authors’ institutions
  • Reporting to relevant professional bodies
  • Legal action where appropriate

7. Post-Publication Corrections

7.1 Corrections

  • Minor errors that do not affect the study’s conclusions
  • Published promptly with clear explanation
  • Linked to original article

7.2 Retractions

  • Serious errors, misconduct, or unreliable findings
  • Published with detailed explanation
  • Original article clearly marked as retracted

7.3 Expressions of Concern

  • Issued when investigation is ongoing
  • Alerts readers to potential issues
  • Updated based on investigation outcomes

8. Appeals Process

8.1 Right to Appeal

  • Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions
  • Appeals must be submitted within 30 days of notification
  • Independent review panel considers appeals

8.2 Appeal Procedures

  • Written appeal with supporting documentation required
  • Review by independent editorial board members
  • Final decision communicated within 45 days

9. Training and Education

9.1 Editorial Training

  • Regular training on publication ethics for all editorial staff
  • Participation in relevant professional development programs
  • Access to current guidelines and best practices

9.2 Author Education

  • Clear guidelines provided to authors
  • Resources on research integrity and publication ethics
  • Workshops and webinars on ethical publishing practices

10. Compliance and Monitoring

10.1 Regular Review

  • Annual review of this statement and associated procedures
  • Monitoring of implementation effectiveness
  • Updates based on evolving best practices and guidelines

10.2 External Standards

  • Compliance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines
  • Adherence to DOAJ standards and requirements
  • Alignment with international publishing ethics standards

11. Reporting Mechanisms

11.1 How to Report

  • Email: [email protected]
  • Online Form: Available on journal websites
  • Postal Address: Boston Research Journals, Ethics Committee, 240 Elm Street, 2nd & 3rd Floor
    Somerville, 02144, Near Boston, Massachusetts, United States.

11.2 Information to Include

  • Clear description of the alleged misconduct
  • Supporting evidence and documentation
  • Contact information for follow-up

12. Transparency and Accountability

12.1 Public Reporting

  • Annual report on publication ethics activities
  • Statistics on misconduct cases and outcomes
  • Continuous improvement initiatives

12.2 Stakeholder Engagement

  • Regular communication with editorial boards
  • Feedback mechanisms for authors and reviewers
  • Collaboration with institutional ethics committees

13. Contact Information

Ethics Committee Chair: Ron Bellard
Email: [email protected]
Address: Boston Research Journals, 240 Elm Street, 2nd & 3rd Floor, Somerville, 02144, Near Boston, Massachusetts, United States.

14. Acknowledgments

This statement has been developed in accordance with guidelines from:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
  • International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)

Boston Research Journals
Website: https://bostonresearch.org
Date of Adoption: 21st January 2017
Next Review Date: 31st December 2025

This document is subject to periodic review and updates. The most current version is available on our website.