Search Content

1. Purpose

This policy establishes the ethical standards that govern all aspects of publication in UNIMA journals. It sets out the duties and responsibilities of editors, peer reviewers, and authors, defines what constitutes publication misconduct, and prescribes the procedures for investigating and addressing breaches of those standards. The policy is grounded in the Best Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and reflects UNIMA's commitment to producing scholarship that is honest, rigorous, and trustworthy.

2. Scope

This policy applies to all content submitted to, under review by, or published in any UNIMA journal. It is binding on:

• Authors and co-authors of submitted and published manuscripts;
• Editors-in-Chief, Associate Editors, and all members of editorial boards;
• Peer reviewers (internal and external);
• Editorial staff and the Editorial Manager;
• Any other party involved in the production or governance of UNIMA journals.

3. Duties of Editors

3.1 Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief of each UNIMA journal bears primary responsibility for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published. These decisions are guided by the editorial policies of the respective journal and by applicable legal requirements, including those relating to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult members of the editorial board or peer reviewers when making publication decisions.

3.2 Fair Play and Non-Discrimination

Editors shall evaluate submitted manuscripts solely on their scholarly merit and intellectual content. No consideration shall be given to the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political affiliation, or institutional affiliation of the authors. Editors shall ensure that the review process is conducted with fairness, consistency, and integrity.

Standards for gender equity in editorial governance are set out in further detail in the Gender, Racial and Inclusive Language Policy.

3.3 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must maintain strict confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts. Information about a manuscript under review shall not be disclosed to any person other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and, where appropriate, the publisher. This obligation continues after a manuscript has been accepted, rejected, or withdrawn.

3.4 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors shall not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the express written consent of the author. Editors who have a conflict of interest with respect to any submission shall recuse themselves from the review process and assign the manuscript to another qualified editor.

3.5 Inclusive Language

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all published work uses language that is culturally sensitive, respectful, and inclusive. Authors shall be advised to revise language that may be considered offensive or exclusionary on the basis of ethnicity, gender, sexuality, age, disability, or any other group characteristic. UNIMA journals reserve the right to decline or request revision of manuscripts that do not meet these standards.

Detailed standards for inclusive language, gender-sensitive terminology, and reporting on race and disability are set out in the Gender, Racial and Inclusive Language Policy.

4. Duties of Peer Reviewers

4.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review is the cornerstone of quality assurance in academic publishing. Peer reviewers assist editors in making sound publication decisions and, through constructive feedback, help authors improve the scholarly quality of their manuscripts.

4.2 Promptness and Qualification

Any reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the research presented in a submitted manuscript, or who knows that they will be unable to complete the review within the agreed timeframe, should promptly notify the editor and withdraw from the review process. This enables the timely assignment of an alternative reviewer.

4.3 Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for peer review must be treated as strictly confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose the contents of a manuscript under review with any other person except as explicitly authorised by the editor. This obligation of confidentiality applies both during and after the review process.

4.4 Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively and impartially. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate and unacceptable. Reviewers are expected to express their assessments clearly and concisely, with supporting arguments and, where appropriate, specific references to relevant literature. Reviews should be constructive and aimed at improving the quality of scholarly output.

4.5 Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work not cited by the authors and provide the relevant citation. Reviewers should also alert the editor to any substantial similarity or apparent overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work within their knowledge.

4.6 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must not accept assignments to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, personal, or other relationships with any of the authors or with the institutions associated with the manuscript. Privileged information or ideas obtained in the course of peer review must be kept strictly confidential and must not be used for personal gain or disclosed to third parties.

5. Duties of Authors

5.1 Reporting Standards

Authors of original research articles must present an accurate, complete, and honest account of the work performed, together with an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be reported accurately. A manuscript should contain sufficient methodological detail and references to enable other qualified researchers to replicate the study. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute serious research misconduct.

5.2 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that the work they submit is entirely original. Where authors have drawn on the work or words of others, this must be acknowledged through accurate citation and, where necessary, quotation marks.

The full provisions governing plagiarism, including definitions, screening procedures, and sanctions, are set out in the Anti-Plagiarism Policy.

5.3 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission

Authors must not submit the same manuscript, or any substantially identical version, to more than one journal simultaneously. Concurrent submission constitutes unethical publishing behaviour. Authors must also not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal without full disclosure and appropriate cross-referencing. Redundant or duplicate publication may result in retraction of the affected articles and notification of the authors' institutions.

5.4 Authorship and Contributor Roles

Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to those individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the research. To qualify as an author, an individual must have:

• contributed to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study;
• participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
• approved the final version of the manuscript submitted for publication; and
• agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

All individuals meeting these criteria should be listed as co-authors. Those who have made other substantive contributions but do not meet all authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section with their consent. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included, that no inappropriate co-authors are listed, and that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the final version before submission.

5.5 Data Access, Integrity, and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide raw data underlying the findings reported in their manuscripts for editorial review. Authors are required to retain research data for a reasonable period following publication.

Specific obligations regarding data sharing and data management are set out in the Data Sharing Policy.

5.6 Acknowledgement of Sources and Funding

Proper acknowledgement of all work that has influenced the reported research must be given. Authors must cite publications that were instrumental in determining the nature of the reported work. All sources of financial support for the research, including grant numbers where applicable, must be disclosed in the manuscript.

5.7 Hazardous or Sensitive Research

Where the reported work involves chemicals, procedures, materials, or equipment carrying unusual hazards, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. Where research involves human or animal subjects, the requirements set out in Section 6 of this policy must be observed.

5.8 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

All authors must disclose, at the time of submission, any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of the manuscript. This includes, but is not limited to, employment or consultancy arrangements, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, and patent applications.

Copyright and financial disclosure requirements at submission are detailed in the Copyright and Licensing Policy.

5.9 Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Authors who use generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools or large language models in the preparation of their manuscripts must disclose such use in the Acknowledgements section and, where applicable, in the Methods section. The name, version, and purpose of the AI tool must be stated. Authors remain solely responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of all content generated with the assistance of AI tools, including the accuracy of any citations or references. AI tools may not be listed as authors on any manuscript submitted to UNIMA journals.

5.10 Corrections to Published Work

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the Editor-in-Chief and to cooperate fully to issue a correction, retraction, or expression of concern as appropriate.

Procedures governing corrections and retractions are set out in the Errata and Retraction Policy.

6. Publication Misconduct

6.1 Definition

Publication misconduct encompasses any intentional act that misrepresents or compromises the integrity of the scholarly record. UNIMA journals regard the following as constituting publication misconduct:

• Fabrication or falsification of data, results, or images;
• Plagiarism of text, data, figures, or ideas;
• Redundant or duplicate publication without disclosure;
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest by authors, editors, or reviewers;
• Manipulation of peer review, including falsification of reviewer identities or collusion;
• Guest authorship, ghost authorship, or purchase of authorship;
• Submission of manuscripts produced by third-party commercial entities ('paper mills');
• Misrepresentation of author affiliations or qualifications.

6.2 Peer Review Integrity

All parties to the peer review process are required to act with honesty, objectivity, and professionalism. Any attempt to manipulate, falsify, or unduly influence the peer review process is a serious act of misconduct. UNIMA journals will investigate all credible allegations of peer review manipulation and may retract affected publications, revoke editorial assignments, and refer matters to the relevant institutions.

6.3 Reporting and Investigation

Any departures from the ethical standards set out in this policy should be reported promptly to the Editor-in-Chief of the relevant journal. All allegations will be investigated in a timely, fair, and transparent manner in accordance with COPE guidelines. Authors and editors who are the subject of an allegation will be given the opportunity to respond before any action is taken.

6.4 Sanctions

Where investigation confirms a breach of this policy, UNIMA journals may take one or more of the following actions, having regard to the severity of the misconduct:

• Rejection of the manuscript at any stage of the review process;
• Retraction of a published article, with a public retraction notice;
• Issuance of a correction or expression of concern;
• Prohibition on future submissions to UNIMA journals for a specified period;
• Formal notification of the author's or editor's employing institution;
• Referral to relevant professional bodies or regulatory authorities.

Procedures for issuing corrections and retractions are set out in Policy 6: Errata and Retraction Policy.

7. Research Ethics and Protection of Participants

7.1 General Requirement

All research submitted to UNIMA journals must have been conducted in accordance with internationally recognised ethical standards. UNIMA journals reserve the right to reject any manuscript where there is reason to believe that ethical standards have not been met, even if ethics approval was obtained or is not required under local regulations.

7.2 Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants must have been reviewed and approved by a duly constituted institutional or national ethics review committee prior to the commencement of the study, and must have been conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and applicable Malawian laws. Authors must confirm in their manuscript that:

• Ethics committee approval was obtained, specifying the name and institutional affiliation of the approving committee;
• Informed written consent was obtained from all participants, or was waived by the ethics committee; and
• The anonymity and confidentiality of participants have been protected throughout.

For manuscripts involving identifiable human data, written consent for publication must have been obtained from participants and must be available for inspection on request.

7.3 Research Involving Animal Subjects

All research involving animals must have been approved by the relevant institutional or national ethics committee and conducted in accordance with applicable Malawian regulations and internationally accepted standards, including the 3Rs principles of Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement. Authors must provide details of the ethics approval obtained and describe the measures taken to minimise suffering and distress to animals.

7.4 Vulnerable Populations

Research involving vulnerable populations, including children, prisoners, persons with cognitive impairments, and communities with limited resources, requires particular care. Authors must describe the measures taken to ensure that participation was fully voluntary and that appropriate safeguards were in place to protect their rights and well-being. UNIMA journals may request additional documentation regarding consent and ethical approval for such research.

8. Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when a personal, financial, or professional relationship could reasonably be perceived as influencing the objectivity of a publication decision, a peer-review assessment, or an editorial action. All authors, editors, and reviewers are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission or upon accepting an editorial or review assignment.

Authors must disclose at submission any financial support received for the research (including the name of the funding body and the role of the funder), employment or consultancy arrangements, equity interests, or other financial or personal relationships that could be perceived as having influenced the research or its reporting.

Editors and reviewers must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest. Such conflicts include, but are not limited to, recent collaboration with any author, current or former supervisory relationships, financial relationships, and close personal relationships.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was reached in error, or that journal policies were misapplied, may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief of the relevant journal within thirty (30) days of the decision. Appeals must set out the specific grounds on which the original decision is challenged and provide any relevant supporting information. Decisions on appeals will be made by a senior editor or editorial board member not involved in the original decision. All decisions on appeals are final.

Complaints regarding alleged misconduct by editors, reviewers, or authors may be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief or the UNIMA Research Committee. All complaints will be handled in accordance with COPE guidelines and with appropriate regard for the confidentiality of all parties involved.

10. Policy Review

The policy will be reviewed from time to time or as developments in publication ethics require. Any revisions will be communicated to all journal editors and made publicly available on the UNIMA website.