Fluxus Editions is firmly committed to promoting the highest ethical publication practices and expects all submitting authors to uphold the high standards of publication ethics as outlined by the Commission on Publication Ethics (COPE). Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated seriously and will be dealt with following the COPE guidelines.
Appeals to editor decisions must provide strong evidence of new data or information in response to the reviewers' and editor's comments. The Grapholinguistics and Its Applications series follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/ guidelines on appeals to editor decisions and complaints about editorial management of the peer review process. Editors will consider one appeal per document, and all decisions will be final. Review and decisions on new submissions will take priority over appeals. For more information about the appeals process, please contact the series editor the document was submitted to. If you have complaints about the editorial management, please contact the editor and the managing editor.
Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Data is available upon reasonable request from the authors as long as it does not violate the protection of human subjects or other valid privacy concerns.
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for research purposes without the author's explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used to their advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
The Editorial Board ensures compliance with COPE's (https://publicationethics.org/) guidelines on ethical oversight. Ethical oversight includes but is not limited to, policies on consent to publication, publication on vulnerable populations, ethical conduct of research using animals, ethical conduct of research using human subjects, handling confidential data, and business/marketing practices.
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively based on their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and their relevance to the series' scope, without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. The policies of governments or other agencies outside the series do not determine decisions to edit and publish. The editors have full authority over the entire editorial content of the series and the timing of publication of that content.
Editors will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. All forms of misconduct are taken seriously and will result in all necessary actions by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/) guidelines. Examples of misconduct include (but are not limited to) affiliation misrepresentation, breaches in copyright/use of third-party material without appropriate permissions, citation manipulation, duplicate submission/publication, avoiding international standards of research ethics, image or data manipulation/fabrication, peer review manipulation, plagiarism, text-recycling/self-plagiarism, undisclosed competing interests, or unethical research.
After a volume has been published, it may be necessary to change the Version of the Record. This will be done after careful consideration by the Editor with guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Any necessary changes will be accompanied by a post-publication notice permanently linked to the original document, such as a Correction notice, an Expression of Concern, a Retraction, or, in rare circumstances, a Removal. These changes are permanent and ensure the integrity of the scholarly record.
The editors ensure that all manuscripts submitted as research documents and being considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The editors are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the series will be published based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers' comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers when making this decision.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
Any manuscripts received for review are confidential and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the [co-executive directors, Editors-in-Chief, etc.] (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of academic endeavor.
Any reviewer who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer's advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and they should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained while providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Only persons who meet the following authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who contributed substantially to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, and general support) should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named has been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. It is the collective responsibility of all the individuals who have conducted the work to determine who should be listed as authors and the order in which authors should be listed.
All authors must declare any competing interests relevant to the document. A competing interest can occur when an author has a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations or people, which could influence the research or interpretation of the results. Authors should also declare any associations that others can perceive as competing interests.
Data is available upon reasonable request from the authors as long as it does not violate the protection of human subjects or other valid privacy concerns.
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, they must promptly notify the series' editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. Suppose the editors learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy. In that case, the author must promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the series editors of the correctness of the paper.
If the work involves using animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures comply with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement. The authors should also include a statement in the manuscript stating that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
Documents describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one proceedings or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit a manuscript already published in another series for consideration.
Authors should ensure that they have written and that they submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution) to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Authors must participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications, and other questions. In the case of a first decision of "revisions necessary," authors should respond to the reviewers' comments systematically, point by point, and promptly, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the series by the deadline given.
In cases where alleged or proven scholarly misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism is brought to the attention of Fluxus Editions, Fluxus Editions staff will consult with the editor. All forms of misconduct are taken seriously and will result in all necessary actions by COPE (https://publicationethics.org/) guidelines. Examples of misconduct include (but are not limited to) affiliation misrepresentation, breaches in copyright/use of third-party material without appropriate permissions, citation manipulation, duplicate submission/publication, avoiding international standards of research ethics, image or data manipulation/fabrication, peer review manipulation, plagiarism, text-recycling/self-plagiarism, undisclosed competing interests, and unethical research.
Fluxus Editions publications are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (CC BY 4.0).