This journal is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics and adheres to the principles and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). It also complies with the executive regulations of the law concerning the prevention of and combating fraud and misconduct in scholarly works.
Editors are expected to:
Assume responsibility for all content published in the journal.
Make every effort to meet the needs of readers and authors.
Work continuously to promote the development and improvement of the journal.
Ensure the quality of published materials in accordance with established academic and editorial standards.
Defend freedom of expression.
Preserve the integrity of the journal's academic record.
Ensure that ethical and intellectual standards are not compromised by financial or commercial considerations.
Be prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies whenever necessary.
Authors are required to:
Ensure that no fabricated data, whether raw or processed, are included in their submitted manuscripts.
Observe the principles of academic integrity. Any use of previously published or unpublished sources must be properly acknowledged and cited.
Ensure that the manuscript contains no discriminatory content based on ethnicity, culture, nationality, gender, identity, age, language, medical status, or other comparable characteristics. Manuscripts containing such discriminatory material may be rejected at the initial screening stage.
Obtain informed consent from all participants involved in the research where applicable. Authors must also carefully protect participants' privacy and ensure that their identities are appropriately anonymized.
Reviewers are expected to:
Review only manuscripts that fall within their professional expertise and for which they have sufficient time to complete the review within the specified period.
Respect the confidentiality of the peer-review process and disclose no information contained in submitted manuscripts at any stage of the review process.
Not use information obtained through peer review for their own benefit or for the benefit of any individual or organization, nor use such information to harm or discredit others.
Disclose any potential conflicts of interest with the journal or manuscript. If they are uncertain about the existence of a conflict, they should contact the journal for clarification.
Ensure that their evaluation is not influenced by the author's nationality, religion, political beliefs, gender, or any other personal characteristic.
Provide impartial and constructive criticism and avoid offensive, abusive, or inappropriate language.
Recognize the reciprocal nature of peer review and complete their responsibilities within the agreed timeframe.
Refrain from impersonating another person during the review process, as such conduct constitutes serious misconduct.
Reviewers should:
Respond within the specified timeframe, particularly if they are unable to undertake the review.
Inform the journal if they lack the professional expertise required to evaluate the manuscript.
Accept a review assignment only when they can complete it within the agreed schedule.
Disclose any potential conflict of interest.
Follow the journal's policies when a conflict of interest arises.
Review manuscripts submitted to them independently and thoroughly, even if they have previously reviewed an earlier version for another journal, because substantial changes may have been made between submissions.
Ensure that any recommendations for alternative reviewers are based on academic suitability rather than personal considerations.
Decline review assignments when their primary interest is obtaining information from the manuscript rather than conducting a genuine scholarly review.
Decline to review a manuscript if they cannot provide an impartial assessment.
Decline to review a manuscript if they have participated in the research.
Decline to review a manuscript if they are conducting similar research or have submitted similar work to another journal.
Reviewers should:
Immediately notify the journal if they identify a conflict of interest that was not apparent when they accepted the assignment.
Immediately inform the journal if they are unable to assess all parts of the manuscript.
Not involve other individuals, including students or trainees, in the review process without prior permission from the journal.
Keep the submitted manuscript and their review comments strictly confidential.
In a double-blind peer-review process, inform the journal if they suspect the identity of an author and believe that this creates a conflict of interest.
Immediately report any suspected ethical irregularity or other serious concern relating to the manuscript.
Not intentionally delay the review beyond the established deadline.
Ensure that their assessment is based solely on the scholarly merits of the manuscript and is not influenced by personal, financial, or other conflicts.
Refrain from contacting the authors directly without authorization from the journal.
Reviewers should:
Provide constructive and impartial comments and offer authors useful recommendations for improving the manuscript.
Avoid insulting comments and unsupported allegations.
Provide detailed criticism and support general judgments with relevant evidence and scholarly reasoning.
Be sensitive to language-related issues, particularly when authors are writing in a language other than their native language.
Clearly identify any substantial additional research required to support claims made in the manuscript.
Ensure that the review does not contain negative or unfair comments directed at any particular individual.
Ensure consistency between the comments submitted to the editor and those communicated to the author.
Refrain from recommending their own publications solely for the purpose of increasing their citation count.
Reviewers should:
Continue to maintain the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript and their review comments.
Respond promptly if contacted by the journal regarding their review and provide any necessary information.
Notify the journal if information that becomes available after submission of the review could materially change their assessment or recommendations.
Where appropriate, consider the comments of other reviewers in order to improve their understanding of the subject and the basis for the editorial decision.
Cooperate with reasonable requests from the journal to revise their review report or reassess the manuscript.
The Journal of Contemporary Iranian Political and Media Studies maintains a strict policy against plagiarism and carefully examines all submitted manuscripts to ensure that published works are original and free from plagiarism.
The journal follows the definitions and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) concerning publication ethics and plagiarism.
In this regard, the journal adopts the definition of plagiarism presented by the American Psychological Association (APA), Publication Manual, Sixth Edition, namely the use of another person's ideas, words, or intellectual work without appropriate acknowledgment of the original source and presenting them as one's own original ideas, words, or work.
Plagiarism may take several forms, including:
Verbatim plagiarism: Copying words or passages, in whole or in part, without quotation marks and without appropriate citation of the original source.
Inadequate paraphrasing: Taking ideas from an original source and modifying the wording or structure in a way that still substantially reflects the original author's expression.
Plagiarism of visual materials: Using charts, photographs, tables, figures, or other visual materials, in whole or in part, without proper attribution.
Unattributed paraphrasing: Taking ideas from an original source and rewriting them in one's own words without appropriate citation or acknowledgment.
The Journal of Contemporary Iranian Political and Media Studies considers any material presented without appropriate citation or acknowledgment of the original source to constitute plagiarism, regardless of the type or status of the source. This includes published or unpublished works, theses and dissertations, lectures, an author's previously published works, PowerPoint presentations, educational and visual materials, scholarly journal articles, magazines, newspapers, and other sources.
The journal carefully examines all submitted manuscripts and takes appropriate action against plagiarism at every stage of the publication process.
If plagiarism is identified in a newly submitted manuscript, the journal's editorial committee will assess the case. If the identified issue is determined to be an inadvertent error, the authors will be notified and given an opportunity to correct the problem. If the plagiarism is determined to be intentional, the authors will be notified and may be placed on the journal's blacklist. Such authors may be subject to restrictions across the journal's related scholarly publications and may be prohibited from submitting manuscripts to the Journal of Contemporary Iranian Political and Media Studies for five years.
In rare cases where plagiarism is discovered after publication, in addition to the measures described above, the published article may be immediately retracted from the journal, and the retraction will be formally announced through the journal's website.
The Journal of Contemporary Iranian Political and Media Studies uses a similarity-detection system to assess the degree of textual similarity between submitted manuscripts and existing scholarly materials. The acceptable similarity rate specified by the journal is up to 12%.
The Editor-in-Chief bears overall responsibility for the scientific and ethical integrity of everything published in the journal. The Editor-in-Chief should:
Seek to meet the needs of readers and authors.
Work continuously to improve the journal.
Establish procedures and processes to ensure the quality of published materials.
Protect freedom of expression.
Maintain the integrity of the journal's academic record.
Prevent commercial interests from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
Remain prepared to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies whenever necessary.
Best editorial practices include:
Actively seeking feedback from authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members regarding ways to improve the journal's processes.
Keeping up to date with developments and research concerning peer review and periodically reassessing the journal's review processes in light of new findings.
Supporting initiatives designed to reduce research and publication misconduct.
Supporting innovation aimed at informing and educating researchers about publication ethics.
Assessing the effects of journal policies on author and reviewer behavior and revising policies when necessary to encourage responsible conduct and prevent misconduct.
Readers have the right to be clearly informed about who has provided financial support for the research or other scholarly work underlying an article and whether the funding source played any role in the research or publication process.
Editors should:
Ensure that all published articles are reviewed by appropriately qualified reviewers, including statistical reviewers or consultants where necessary.
Establish processes that promote the accuracy, completeness, and clarity of research reports, including technical editing and the appropriate use of guidelines and checklists.
Develop a transparent policy encouraging full disclosure of the origins and sources of non-research and other relevant materials.
Establish policies and systems that promote appropriate ethical practices in authorship and co-authorship, including clear identification of individual contributions, while preventing practices such as ghost authorship and guest authorship.
Inform readers that manuscripts submitted by members of the journal's editorial board will undergo the same rigorous and impartial review process as other submissions.
Editorial decisions to accept or reject manuscripts should be based on the manuscript's significance, originality, clarity, methodological and scholarly validity, and relevance to the scope of the journal.
Editors should not reverse decisions to accept submissions unless serious problems concerning the submission are identified.
New editors should not overturn publication decisions concerning manuscripts made by previous editors unless serious problems are identified.
The journal should provide authors with a clearly stated mechanism for appealing editorial decisions.
Editors should publish clear guidelines explaining all requirements and expectations for authors. These guidelines should be regularly updated and should refer to or provide a link to the journal's publication ethics code.
Editors should provide clear guidance regarding authorship criteria and the individuals who should be listed as contributors in accordance with relevant disciplinary standards.
Editors should:
Regularly review and update the journal's author guidelines and provide links to relevant instructions.
Disclose relevant conflicts of interest concerning contributors and publish corrections if a conflict of interest becomes apparent after publication.
Ensure that appropriate, qualified, and relevant reviewers are selected for every manuscript, particularly reviewers capable of evaluating the work objectively and without conflicts of interest.
Respect reasonable and well-founded requests by authors that a particular individual not be assigned as a reviewer.
Publish details of the procedures used to handle suspected cases of research or publication misconduct.
Publish the dates of manuscript submission and acceptance.
Editors should prepare comprehensive guidelines for reviewers. These guidelines should be regularly updated and should refer to or provide a link to the journal's publication ethics code.
Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential conflicts of interest before agreeing to review a manuscript.
Editors should have systems in place to protect the identities of peer reviewers, unless the journal operates an openly identified peer-review system that has been clearly communicated to authors and reviewers.
Editors should:
Encourage reviewers to comment on ethical concerns and potential research or publication misconduct arising from submissions, including data manipulation and inappropriate presentation of data.
Encourage reviewers to assess the originality of submitted materials and remain alert to duplicate publication and plagiarism.
Provide reviewers with appropriate tools and resources for identifying relevant literature, such as links to cited references and bibliographic searches.
Forward reviewers' comments to authors in full, except where comments contain offensive, defamatory, or otherwise inappropriate statements.
Recognize and appreciate reviewers' contributions to the journal.
Encourage academic institutions to recognize peer-review activities as part of scholarly service.
Monitor reviewer performance and take appropriate steps to ensure that high standards are maintained.
Develop and maintain an appropriate and up-to-date database of qualified reviewers based on their performance.
Discontinue the use of reviewers who consistently provide rude, poor-quality, or excessively delayed reviews.
Use a broad range of sources, rather than relying solely on personal contacts, to identify potential new reviewers, including author recommendations and bibliographic databases.
Follow the relevant COPE flowcharts when dealing with suspected reviewer misconduct.
Editors should provide new editorial board members with clear guidance regarding their roles and responsibilities and should keep existing members informed about new policies, procedures, and developments.
Editors should:
Establish policies for handling manuscripts submitted by editorial board members in order to ensure impartial and independent review.
Identify suitably qualified editorial board members who can actively contribute to the development and effective management of the journal, while regularly reviewing the composition of the editorial board.
Provide clear guidance to editorial board members concerning their expected responsibilities, which may include:
Serving as ambassadors for the journal.
Supporting and promoting the journal.
Identifying high-quality authors and scholarly works and actively encouraging appropriate submissions.
Reviewing manuscripts submitted to the journal.
Writing editorials and reviewing or commenting on articles within their areas of expertise.
Participating actively in editorial board meetings.
Periodically consulting with other editorial board members, for example annually, to assess the journal's performance, communicate changes in editorial policies, and identify future challenges.
Contemporary Iranian Political and Media Studies