Statement on Publication Ethics and Good Scientific Practice
The Journal of Higher Education Development (Zeitschrift für Hochschulentwicklung, ZFHE) follows the recommendations (Core Practices) of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following are key points.
Duties of Editors
Fairness and editorial independence
Editors judge submissions solely on their academic merit (importance, originality, validity, clarity) and relevance to the subject matter of the issue or journal. Origin, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, religion, political affiliation, or institutional affiliation are irrelevant. The editors are responsible for the entire content of the issue.
Confidentiality
The editors will not disclose information about submissions to anyone other than authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, or other editorial staff.
Publication and conflicts of interest
The editors will not use any unpublished information obtained through submissions for their own research without the explicit written consent of the authors. Confidential information or ideas that editors obtain as a result of processing submissions will be kept confidential and will not be used for personal advantage. Editors will decline to edit submissions in which they have a conflict of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with authors, companies, or institutions. In this case, another member of the editorial board should evaluate the submitted article.
Publication decisions
The editors are solely responsible for deciding which articles will be published. After an initial review by the editors themselves, articles that have been accepted into the review process are evaluated by at least two peer reviewers who are experts or competent in the field. The publication decision is based on the peer reviews, the significance of the article for researchers and readers, and legal aspects such as offense, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Participation and cooperation in investigations
The editors will take action if they encounter ethical doubts regarding a contribution. Any reported case of unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication. Editors will follow the COPE flowcharts in processing suspected misconduct. If the investigation reveals that the doubt is substantiated, a correction, retraction, or other relevant note will be published in the journal.
Duties of the reviewers
Contribute to editorial decisions
The peer review process assists editors in making editorial decisions. By providing suggestions to authors, reviewers can also help improve submitted articles. Peer review is an essential part of scholarly communication.
Promptness
If an invited reviewer does not feel qualified to evaluate a paper or knows that rapid evaluation is not possible, the reviewer should inform the editors immediately so that other reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any contributions that are evaluated are confidential documents and will be treated accordingly. They may not be forwarded to others or discussed with others unless the editors have agreed (which they would do only under special and specific circumstances). This also applies to invited reviewers who decline to take over the review. Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the review process, details of a manuscript, or any related communication during or after the review process, even after publication in the journal.
Objectivity standards
Reviews should be clearly formulated, supported by arguments and provide the editors with a basis for the publication decision. As a general rule, the authors should be able to use reviews to improve the article. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant, non-cited parts of the paper. Any statement (observation, deduction, or argument) that has already been made in a previous publication must be accompanied by a citation to that effect. Reviewers should also notify editors if they find a substantial similarity or overlap between the evaluated paper and any other papers (published or unpublished) of which they are aware.
Publication and Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers should not review contributions in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other relationships with authors, companies or institutions. In this case, another reviewer should evaluate the submitted paper. Reviewers will not use any unpublished information obtained from submitted papers for their own research without the authors’ explicit written consent. Confidential information or ideas obtained by the reviewers as a result of processing submissions should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline to be evaluated.
Duties of authors
General rules
Authors of original research articles should present an accurate account of the work performed and its results, followed by a discussion of the significance of the results. The article should provide sufficient detail and references so that others can replicate the research. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive. Editorial opinions or articles from specific perspectives must be clearly presented as such. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are unethical behavior and thus unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that they submit only independently written articles and that they cite correctly. Plagiarism may occur in various forms: using other people’s content as if it were one’s own; copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of other articles without citation; adopting others’ research results without citation. Any form of plagiarism is unethical behavior and unacceptable.
Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submission or publication of articles describing the same research should not occur or be published in more than one journal. It follows that authors should not submit articles that have already been published in another journal. Submitting an article to more than one journal at the same time is unethical behavior and therefore unacceptable. Publishing articles (such as guides or translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justified if certain conditions are met (e.g., to represent a broad diversity of perspectives on a topic in one journal issue). The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to a second publication, and this must contain the same data and interpretations as the first publication, but may be updated (e.g., including more recent literature or in-depth analyses). The first publication must be cited in the second.
Rules for the use of artificial intelligence (AI)
These guidelines can serve as a basis for ensuring that manuscripts using AI methods are transparent, reproducible and ethically produced. It is essential that scientific integrity is not compromised by the use of AI and that the scientific community is able to verify and reproduce the results presented. Only the responsible natural persons can appear as authors in scientific publications. They must ensure that the use of generative models does not infringe the intellectual property of others and that there is no scientific misconduct, such as plagiarism.
1. Disclosure of use of AI
Authors must explicitly state if AI technology has been used at any stage of the research, e.g. in the collection of data, in the analysis, in the writing or in any other aspect.
2. Data ethics
Authors must ensure that ethical guidelines have been followed when using AI for data analysis. This includes respect for privacy and data protection. In the case of the use of personal data, the consent of the data subject or ethics approval must be obtained and must be noted in the manuscript.
3. Critical evaluation of the output of the AI
Authors should critically evaluate and discuss the validity and reliability of the results generated by AI. The limitations of AI methods and possible biases in the data or in the algorithms should be presented and discussed in a transparent way.
4. Responsibility and authorship
Authors need to be clear about the role played by AI in the research process and about authorship. The AI should not be listed as an author, and it should be clear that human authors are responsible for the content. A section on the contribution of each author is intended to make transparent the specific roles played by all those involved, both human and AI.
5. Independent review
In some cases, independent verification of AI-generated results may be required to ensure the validity of the research.
6. How to cite AI software
If specific AI software or tools are used, these should be cited correctly, including the version. Using APA style, please cite "OpenAI" followed by the year published or the year to which you refer. "GPT-4" is the title of the software, followed by the type of source (computer software).Finally, to direct readers to the original source, give the organisation ("OpenAI") and the URL of the website. Example: OpenAI. (2022). GPT-4. [Computer Software]. OpenAI. https://www.openai.com/
Example sentence: "In the context of stylistic changes ... was used".
7. User interactions
The interface and interaction between the researchers and the AI should be explained to clarify how decisions were made and to what extent the AI influenced the research process.
Authorship of the article
Only individuals who meet the criteria for authorship may be listed as authors of the article, as they must take responsibility for the content. The criteria are as follows:
- The person significantly contributed to the conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis/interpretation;
- the person has written a draft of the article or critically revised the content; and
- the person has read and endorsed the final version of the article and consented to its submission for publication purposes.
All persons who contributed substantially to the article (e.g., technical assistance, editing, general help) but do not meet the criteria for authorship may not be listed as authors but should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements. Corresponding authors should ensure that all co-authors (as defined above), but not individuals who do not meet the above criteria, are listed as authors. In addition, it should be ensured that all co-authors have read and accepted the final version and agreed to submit it for publication.
Confidentiality and conflicts of interest
Authors should disclose as early as possible (usually at the time of article submission) any conflicts of interest that may affect the results or interpretations of their article. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial conflicts of interest (including - but not limited to - salaries, grants, participation in offices, membership, employment, management consulting, stock ownership, equity interests, paid expert opinions, patent awards), as well as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or belief in the content or materials discussed in the article. All sources of financial support (with the necessary grant number, if applicable) should be disclosed.
Copyright of the reviews rests with the reviewers unless formally assigned to someone else. Only if all parties agree (journal, authors, reviewers), the reviews or parts of them can be published.
Acknowledgement of sources
Authors should ensure that they cite in a correct manner. Information obtained privately (through conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) may not be used without explicit written permission from the source. Authors may not use information obtained by providing confidential services (such as expert opinions or grant proposals) unless they have the explicit, written permission of the corresponding authors.
Peer Review
Authors agree to participate and cooperate in the peer review process. This includes prompt responses to reviewers’ requests for data, explanations, evidence of ethical conduct, consent of experimental and interview subjects, and copyright issues. Authors are expected to respond systematically, selectively, and in a timely manner to the editors in the review process, revise their article, and submit it by the agreed-upon deadline.
Fundamental errors in already published articles
If the authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their already published articles, it is their duty to immediately notify the journal editors as well as to cooperate with them to either correct or withdraw the article. If the editors learn from a third party that published articles contain significant errors or inaccuracies, it is the editors’ duty to take immediate action, i.e. to ask authors to immediately correct them, withdraw the article, or provide evidence of the article’s accuracy.
This text is an adapted version of the "Statement on Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice" of the Zeitschrift für Praktische Philosophie, CC BY 4.0