Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The main Areas relevant to the scope of the journal is social science studies and also the journal focuses on the following topics:

  • Anthropology
  • Sociology
  • Politics 
  • Economics
  • law
  • Psychology
  • Management
  • Culture
  • History
  • Educational Research 
  • Linguistics
  • Ethnic Relations
  • Immigration and Migrant Workers Studies
  • Multicultural studies
  • Sports science
  • Business Studies
  • Public relations
  • Communication
  • Peace Studies and Religious Studies

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Reviewers’ responsibilities:

The journal uses double-blind system for peer-review; both reviewers and authors’ identities remain anonymous. The paper will be peer-reviewed by three experts; two reviewers from outside and one editor from the journal typically involve in reviewing a submission.

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Reviewers are expected to provide constructive comments on the manuscript that help the author(s) to revise the manuscript in higher standards and quality.

2. Promptness

Reviewers that feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

3. Confidentiality

The reviewers should treat as confidential document any manuscripts received for review. They manuscript should not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

4. Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

5. Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

6. Reviewer misconduct

Ijmmu will take reviewer misconduct seriously and pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, non-declaration of conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), inappropriate use of confidential material, or delay of peer review for competitive advantage. 


 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Complaints Policy

This procedure applies to complaints about the policies, procedures, or actions of the IJMMU’s editorial staff. We welcome complaints as they provide an opportunity and a spur for improvement, and we aim to respond quickly, courteously, and constructively.  Please write your complaint with journal title, vol. no., issue no., paper ID, paper title, page no. 

Our definition of a complaint is as follows:

  • The complainant defines his or her expression of unhappiness as a complaint.
  • We infer that the complainant is not simply disagreeing with a decision we have made or something we have published (which happens every day) but thinks that there has been a failure of process - for example, a long delay or a rude response - or a severe misjudgment.
  • The complaint must be about something that is within the responsibility of the American Journal of Trade and Policy- content or process.
 
American Journal of Trade and Policy are aware of the complaints stated below:
  1. Authorship complaints
  2. Plagiarism complaints
  3. Multiple, duplicate, concurrent publication/Simultaneous submission
  4. Research results misappropriation
  5. Allegations of research errors and fraud
  6. Research standards violations
  7. Undisclosed conflicts of interest
  8. Reviewer bias or competitive harmful acts by reviewers
 
Policy for Handling Complaints 
If the Journal receives a complaint that any contribution to the Journal infringes intellectual property rights or contains material inaccuracies, libelous materials or otherwise unlawful materials, the Journal will investigate the complaint. Investigation may include a request that the parties involved substantiate their claims. The Journal will make a good faith determination whether to remove the allegedly wrongful material. A decision not to remove material should represent the Journal's belief that the complaint is without sufficient foundation, or if well‐founded, that a legal defense or exemption may apply, such as truthfulness of a statement in the case of libel. Journal should document its investigation and decision. We strive to ensure that American Journal of Trade and Policy is of the highest quality and is free from errors. However, we accept that occasionally mistakes might happen.

Editorial Complaints Policy
The Managing Editor and staff of International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding will make every endeavor to put matters right as soon as possible in the most appropriate way, offering right of reply where necessary. As far as possible, we will investigate complaints in a blame-free manner, looking to see how systems can be improved to prevent mistakes occurring.

Guiding Principles
Our general approach to complaints is that they are a rare but inevitable part of a process that involves putting together complex material at great speed. We accept that we make mistakes and try to treat all complaints with urgency, however small. We believe that timely solutions can prevent problems escalating. All substantial errors and complaints are referred to senior executives within the editorial staff as a matter of course.
The procedure outlined below aims to be fair to those making complaints and those complained about. All complaints will be acknowledged (within three working days if by email). If possible a definitive response will be made within two weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within two weeks. Interim responses will be provided until the complaint is finally resolved. If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the editor, whose decision is final.

How to Make a Complaint
Complaints about editorial content should be made as soon as possible after publication, preferably in writing by email to: [email protected] . 

 

Plagiarism Policy

IJMMU checks the originality of the manuscripts by iThenticate and presents the “Similarity Report” to the authors. Authors should ensure that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Copyright material (e.g. tables, figures or extensive quotations) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. 

The journal is strictly against any unethical act of copying or plagiarism in any form. Plagiarism is said to have occurred when large portions of a manuscript have been copied from existing previously published resources. All manuscripts submitted for publication to IJMMU are cross-checked for plagiarism using Turnitin software. Manuscripts found to be plagiarized during initial stages of review are out-rightly rejected and not considered for publication in the journal. In case a manuscript is found to be plagiarized after publication, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct preliminary investigation, may be with the help of a suitable committee constituted for the purpose. If the manuscript is found to be plagiarized beyond the acceptable limits, the journal will contact the author’s Institute / College / University and Funding Agency, if any. A determination of misconduct will lead IJMMU to run a statement bi-directionally linked online to and from the original paper, to note the plagiarism and provide a reference to the plagiarized material. The paper containing the plagiarism will also be marked on each page of the PDF. Upon determination of the extent of plagiarism, the paper may also be formally retracted.

Types of Plagiarism
The following types of plagiarism are considered by IJMMU:

  1. Full Plagiarism: Previously published content without any changes to the text, idea and grammar is considered as full plagiarism. It involves presenting exact text from a source as one’s own.
  2. Partial Plagiarism: If content is a mixture from multiple different sources, where the author has extensively rephrased text, then it is known as partial plagiarism.
  3. Self-Plagiarism: When an author reuses complete or portions of their pre-published research, then it is known as self-plagiarism. Complete self-plagiarism is a case when an author republishes their own previously published work in a new journal.

Policy and Action for Plagiarism
IJMMU respects intellectual property and aims at protecting and promoting original work of its authors. Manuscripts containing plagiarized material are against the standards of quality, research and innovation. Hence, all authors submitting articles to IJMMU are expected to abide ethical standards and abstain from plagiarism, in any form. In case, an author is found to be suspected of plagiarism in a submitted or published manuscript then, IJMMU shall contact the author (s) to submit his / her (their) explanation within two weeks, which may be forwarded to the Fact Finding Committee (FFC) constituted for the purpose, for further course of action. If IJMMU does not receive any response from the author within the stipulated time period, then the Director / Dean / Head of the concerned College, Institution or Organization or the Vice Chancellor of the University to which the author is affiliated shall be contacted to take strict action against the concerned author.

IJMMU shall take serious action against published manuscripts found to contain plagiarism and shall completely remove them from IJISME website and other third party websites where the paper is listed and indexed. The moment, any article published in IJMMU database is reported to be plagiarized, IJMMU will constitute a Fact Finding Committee (FFC) to investigate the same. Upon having established that the manuscript is plagiarized from some previously published work, IJMMU shall support the original author and manuscript irrespective of the publisher and may take any or all of the following immediate actions or follow the additional course of actions as recommended by the committee:

  1. IJMMU editorial office shall immediately contact the Director / Dean / Head of the concerned College, Institution or Organization or the Vice Chancellor of the University to which the author(s) is (are) affiliated to take strict action against the concerned author.
  2. IJMMU shall remove the PDF copy of the published manuscript from the website and disable all links to full text article. The term Plagiarized Manuscript shall be appended to the published manuscript title.
  3. IJMMU shall disable the author account with the journal and reject all future submissions from the author for a period of 03 / 05 / 10 years or even ban the authors permanently.
  4. IJMMU may also display the list of such authors along with their full contact details on the IJMMU website.
  5. Any other course of action, as recommended by the Committee or as deemed fit for the instant case or as decided by the Editorial Board, from time to time.

 

Conflicts of interest

Editors, authors, and peer reviewers should disclose interests that might appear to affect their ability to present or review work objectively. These might include relevant financial interests (for example, patent ownership, stock ownership, consultancies, or speaker's fees), or personal, political, or religious interests.

"A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients' welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest."

Strict policies preventing people with conflicts of interest from publishing might encourage authors to conceal relevant interests, and might therefore be counterproductive.

  • Journal editors, board members, and staff who are involved with decisions about publication should declare their interests. Journals should consider publishing these on their website and updating them as required, as well as disclosing how conflicts of interest were managed for specific papers.
  • Editors should clearly explain what should be disclosed, including the period that these statements should cover (for example, 3 years). Editors should ask authors to describe relevant funding, including the purpose of the funding (for example, travel grant and speaker's fees), and to describe relevant patents, stocks, and shares that they own.
  • Editors should publish authors' conflicts of interest whenever they are relevant, or a statement of their absence. If there is doubt, editors should opt in favor of greater disclosure.
  • If authors state that there are no conflicts of interest, editors should publish a confirmation to this effect.
  • Editors should manage peer reviewers' conflicts of interest. An invitation to review a manuscript should be accompanied by a request for the reviewer to reveal any potential conflicts of interest and a request for the peer reviewer to disqualify or recuse themselves when these are relevant.
  • When editors, members of editorial boards, and other editorial staff are presented with papers where their own interests may be perceived to impair their ability to make an unbiased editorial decision, they should withdraw from discussions, deputize decisions, or suggest that authors seek publication in a different journal.

 

Publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

IJMMU has zero tolerance for academic misconduct, including "Duplicate Publication," "Salami Publication," "Plagiarism", "Fake Submissions", "Ghost Authorship", "Fabrication of Data", and "Fake External Reviewer Suggestions". All manuscripts are investigated thoroughly regarding any potential unethical conduct. All of the required documents about the research (clinical trial registration ID, research ethics approval, authorization letter for publishing case reports, etc.) are required. Regarding the plagiarism, all submissions will be checked for potential copy-paste jobs using iThenticate.

1. Publication decisions

Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts should be published. Editors and reviewers treat all manuscripts as confidential documents do not show to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor. 

2. Fair play

The editor evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the authors or the host institution including race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

3. Confidentiality

The editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and other editorial advisers as appropriate. In the case of a misconduct investigation, the editor-in-chief may disclose material to third parties (e.g., an institutional investigation committee or other editors). 

 4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research.

 5. Corrections

When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or editors, a correction will be published as soon as possible. If the error renders the work or substantial parts of it invalid, the paper should be retracted with an explanation as to the reason for retraction.

 6. Ensuring the integrity of the published record

If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, the editor-in-chief will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, the journal will take this to the institutional level. In cases when concerns are very serious and the published work is likely to influence clinical practice or public health, the journal may consider informing readers about these concerns, while the investigation is ongoing. Once an investigation is concluded the journal will publish comment that explains the findings of the investigation. Editor-in-chief may decide to retract a paper if a serious misconduct has happened even if an investigation by an institution or national body does not recommend it.