Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
The Journal of Research in Agriculture and Food Sciences (JRAFS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, research integrity, transparency, and responsible scholarly publishing. The journal is dedicated to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record and ensuring that all manuscripts are handled fairly, objectively, confidentially, and consistently.
JRAFS follows the Core Practices and ethical guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and applies internationally recognized principles of responsible research and scholarly publishing.
The journal expects authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to act honestly, transparently, responsibly, and professionally throughout the publication process.
JRAFS does not tolerate plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, manipulation of data or images, duplicate or redundant publication, inappropriate authorship practices, undisclosed conflicts of interest, manipulation of peer review, citation manipulation, or other forms of research or publication misconduct.
All research articles submitted to JRAFS are subject to the journal's double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other. Manuscripts are normally evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with appropriate subject expertise.
JRAFS also uses iThenticate or an equivalent similarity-detection system as part of its research-integrity screening. Similarity reports are considered as part of an editorial assessment and are not, by themselves, evidence of plagiarism or misconduct.
Where concerns regarding research or publication misconduct arise, JRAFS will investigate them fairly, objectively, and confidentially and will take appropriate action. Such action may include rejection of a manuscript, correction or retraction of a published article, publication of an expression of concern, or referral of the matter to the relevant institution or authority.
1. Responsibilities of Authors
Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical conduct of the research reported in their manuscripts.
Authors submitting manuscripts to JRAFS must:
Ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published previously, except where prior dissemination is permitted under the journal's policies.
Ensure that the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal.
Ensure that all data, results, figures, tables, methods, and other research materials are reported accurately and honestly.
Not engage in fabrication, falsification, manipulation, plagiarism, or other forms of research misconduct.
Properly acknowledge and cite the work, ideas, data, methods, and intellectual contributions of others.
Ensure that all individuals listed as authors meet the journal's authorship requirements and have made an appropriate contribution to the work.
Obtain the agreement of all authors to the submitted manuscript and its submission to JRAFS.
Disclose all relevant financial and non-financial conflicts of interest.
Declare all sources of financial support and funding for the research and, where applicable, describe the role of the funder.
Obtain all necessary ethical approvals, permits, permissions, licenses, and other authorizations required for the research.
Comply with applicable ethical requirements for research involving humans, animals, biological materials, genetically modified organisms, or other regulated research activities, where applicable.
Provide sufficient methodological and supporting information to allow appropriate evaluation of the research.
Disclose relevant use of artificial intelligence (AI) or generative AI tools in accordance with the journal's AI policy.
Cooperate with the editorial office during investigations of suspected ethical or research-integrity concerns.
Promptly inform the journal if a significant error or inaccuracy is discovered in a published article and cooperate with the editors in issuing an appropriate correction, retraction, or other notice.
Authors must not knowingly provide false or misleading information during manuscript submission, including false statements regarding authorship, conflicts of interest, funding, ethical approval, reviewer recommendations, originality, or research procedures.
2. Authorship and Contributorship
Authorship must be based on genuine and substantial intellectual or scholarly contributions to the research and manuscript.
All listed authors should:
Have made a meaningful contribution to the conception, design, conduct, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or other substantive aspects of the research, as applicable;
Have participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content;
Have approved the final version of the manuscript; and
Accept responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of their contribution to the work.
Individuals who contributed to the research but do not meet the requirements for authorship should be appropriately acknowledged, with their permission where applicable.
The corresponding author is responsible for communicating with the journal and should ensure that:
All authors have approved the submitted manuscript;
All authors have agreed to its submission to JRAFS;
Author contributions are accurately reported; and
Relevant conflicts of interest and funding information have been disclosed.
Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission or acceptance must be justified and approved by all authors, including the affected authors. The journal may request written confirmation from all authors before considering any change in authorship.
Authorship disputes that cannot be resolved among the authors may be referred to the relevant institution(s) for investigation.
3. Originality, Plagiarism, and Redundant Publication
JRAFS considers plagiarism, duplicate publication, redundant publication, and inappropriate reuse of previously published material to be serious violations of publication ethics.
Plagiarism includes presenting another person's words, ideas, data, figures, images, methods, or other intellectual work as one's own without appropriate attribution.
The journal uses iThenticate or an equivalent similarity-detection system to identify substantial text overlap and potential problems involving inappropriate reuse of material.
A similarity score or similarity report is not, by itself, evidence of plagiarism. The editorial team evaluates the nature, extent, location, source, and context of any detected overlap before making an editorial decision.
Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.
Duplicate or redundant publication, substantial undisclosed overlap with previously published work, and inappropriate fragmentation of research may result in rejection or post-publication corrective action.
Where legitimate overlap exists, authors should disclose relevant related publications, preprints, conference papers, datasets, theses, or manuscripts to the editor at submission.
4. Research Misconduct
JRAFS considers the following, among other practices, to constitute serious research or publication-integrity concerns:
Fabrication of data or results;
Falsification or manipulation of data, research records, or results;
Inappropriate or misleading manipulation of images;
Plagiarism;
Duplicate or redundant publication;
Undisclosed substantial text or content reuse;
Inappropriate, fraudulent, or purchased authorship;
Concealment of relevant conflicts of interest;
False statements concerning ethical approval, funding, permissions, or research procedures;
Manipulation or attempted manipulation of the peer review process;
Suggesting fabricated or inappropriate reviewers;
Citation manipulation intended to artificially increase citations or journal metrics;
Misrepresentation of research findings or methodology; and
Other deliberate actions intended to misrepresent research or publication practices.
Research-integrity concerns may be identified before or after publication and may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, or other interested parties.
5. Handling Allegations of Misconduct
JRAFS takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and will assess concerns in a fair, impartial, proportionate, and confidential manner.
When a potential ethical problem is identified, the Editor-in-Chief or designated editor may:
Review the available information and determine whether further investigation is warranted;
Request an explanation or supporting documentation from the authors;
Consult reviewers, editors, editorial advisers, or appropriate subject experts;
Request relevant institutional, ethical, or research documentation;
Contact the authors' institution or other responsible organization when institutional investigation is appropriate;
Take interim measures where necessary to protect the integrity of the peer review process or scholarly record; and
Take appropriate editorial action based on the available evidence.
JRAFS will follow relevant COPE guidance and flowcharts when handling suspected research or publication misconduct.
The editorial office will normally keep allegations confidential while an investigation is ongoing. However, information may be disclosed when necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, comply with legal or ethical obligations, or facilitate an appropriate institutional investigation.
6. Responsibilities of Editors
Editors are responsible for maintaining a fair, objective, confidential, transparent, and ethical editorial process.
Editors must:
Evaluate manuscripts on the basis of scientific quality, originality, relevance, methodological soundness, and suitability for the journal;
Ensure that editorial decisions are not influenced by authors' nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political views, institutional affiliation, or other irrelevant personal characteristics;
Select appropriate and independent reviewers;
Maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and associated editorial communications;
Manage conflicts of interest appropriately;
Protect unpublished information obtained through the editorial process from unauthorized use;
Take reasonable and appropriate action when ethical concerns or allegations of misconduct arise;
Ensure that corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or other appropriate notices are published when necessary;
Maintain appropriate editorial independence from commercial or other external interests; and
Handle complaints and appeals fairly and according to the journal's established procedures.
Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a significant conflict of interest. Such manuscripts should be assigned to an appropriate independent editor.
Editors must not use unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for their own research or professional advantage without the authors' explicit permission.
7. Responsibilities of Reviewers
JRAFS follows a double-blind peer review model. The identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process to the extent reasonably possible.
Reviewers must:
Treat manuscripts and all associated information as strictly confidential;
Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and constructively;
Provide evidence-based comments that assist editors and authors;
Disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest;
Decline a review if they lack the appropriate expertise or cannot provide an impartial assessment;
Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe or inform the editorial office if additional time is required;
Not use unpublished information, data, methods, ideas, or findings obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage;
Identify potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, serious methodological problems, or other ethical concerns and confidentially report them to the editor;
Not contact authors directly regarding the manuscript without authorization from the editorial office; and
Avoid discriminatory, hostile, defamatory, or personally offensive comments.
Reviewers should not upload or disclose confidential manuscript content to external AI or generative AI systems unless such use is expressly permitted by the journal and does not compromise confidentiality.
8. Conflicts of Interest
Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members must disclose relationships or activities that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their judgment.
Conflicts of interest may be financial or non-financial and may include:
Employment;
Consultancy;
Research funding;
Personal relationships;
Professional relationships;
Academic competition;
Institutional interests;
Intellectual or commercial interests; or
Other circumstances that could reasonably create potential bias.
A conflict of interest does not necessarily prevent publication or participation in peer review. However, relevant conflicts must be disclosed and appropriately managed.
Editors and reviewers with a significant conflict of interest must recuse themselves from the relevant editorial or review process.
9. Funding and Funder Involvement
Authors must disclose all sources of financial support for the research reported in the manuscript.
Where applicable, authors should state the role of the funder in:
Study design;
Data collection;
Data analysis and interpretation;
Manuscript preparation;
The decision to submit the manuscript; and
The decision to publish the results.
If the funder had no involvement in these activities, this should be stated where appropriate.
Authors should retain independence in the analysis, interpretation, and reporting of research findings.
10. Ethical Approval and Research Participants
Authors are responsible for ensuring that research involving humans, animals, biological materials, or other regulated activities complies with applicable ethical standards, laws, regulations, institutional requirements, and professional guidelines.
Where ethical approval is required, the manuscript should provide the name of the approving committee or institution and the relevant approval or reference number, where applicable.
For research involving human participants, authors should obtain appropriate informed consent and comply with applicable privacy and confidentiality requirements.
For research involving animals, authors should comply with applicable institutional, national, and international standards for animal welfare and ethical research.
The journal may request documentary evidence of ethical approval, informed consent, permits, or other required permissions.
Manuscripts may be rejected, or published articles may be subject to corrective action, if required ethical approvals or permissions were not obtained or if the reported research does not meet applicable ethical standards.
11. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern
JRAFS is committed to maintaining an accurate, transparent, and reliable scholarly record.
When an error or problem is identified after publication, the journal will assess the matter and may publish:
Correction
A correction may be published when an error affects the article but does not invalidate its main findings or conclusions.
Retraction
A retraction may be issued when the findings or conclusions are substantially unreliable, when serious research or publication misconduct has occurred, or when other circumstances require removal of reliance on the published findings.
Expression of Concern
An expression of concern may be published when there are serious unresolved concerns about an article but the available evidence is insufficient to justify immediate retraction.
Corrective notices will be clearly identified, linked to the affected article, and will explain the reason for the correction, retraction, or expression of concern.
Where appropriate, the original article will remain part of the scholarly record with a clear indication of its corrected or retracted status.
Honest errors are not automatically considered misconduct. The appropriate editorial response depends on the nature, seriousness, and consequences of the error.
12. Complaints and Appeals
JRAFS provides mechanisms for authors, reviewers, readers, and other interested parties to raise legitimate concerns or complaints regarding editorial or publication practices.
Complaints and appeals will be considered fairly, objectively, and, where appropriate, confidentially.
Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that:
A significant factual error affected the decision;
The manuscript was misunderstood;
A serious procedural irregularity occurred; or
A substantial problem in the peer review process affected the decision.
Appeals should provide specific reasons and, where possible, supporting evidence.
An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision. The journal may seek an independent editorial assessment or additional expert opinion where appropriate.
Editorial decisions based solely on the journal's scope, available space, priority, or overall editorial suitability may not necessarily be subject to substantive reconsideration unless there is evidence of procedural irregularity or error.
13. Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI
JRAFS recognizes that artificial intelligence (AI), including generative AI tools, may assist researchers and authors in certain aspects of scholarly work. Such tools must be used responsibly, transparently, and in a manner that does not compromise research integrity, confidentiality, originality, or accountability.
13.1 AI and Authorship
AI tools, including generative AI systems, cannot be listed as authors or co-authors because they cannot take responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, or accountability of scholarly work.
Human authors remain fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, including content generated or assisted by AI tools.
13.2 Permitted Uses of AI
AI tools may be used for appropriate purposes such as:
Language improvement and grammar correction;
Improving readability and clarity;
Translation assistance;
Brainstorming or organizing ideas;
Assistance with coding or data-processing tasks where appropriately verified; and
Other limited supporting activities that do not replace the authors' intellectual responsibility.
Authors remain responsible for independently verifying all AI-assisted content, including factual statements, references, calculations, interpretations, and generated material.
13.3 Disclosure of AI Use
Authors must disclose substantive use of AI or generative AI tools in manuscript preparation when such use goes beyond routine spelling, grammar, or language correction.
Where disclosure is required, authors should identify the AI tool used and describe its role in the preparation of the manuscript.
AI tools must not be used to fabricate data, references, citations, research findings, images, experimental results, or other scholarly content.
13.4 AI and Peer Review
Reviewers and editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.
Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscript content, unpublished data, figures, tables, or other protected material into external AI or generative AI systems where doing so could compromise confidentiality, intellectual property, or the integrity of the peer review process.
Any use of AI by reviewers or editors must be consistent with the journal's confidentiality requirements and applicable policies.
13.5 Human Responsibility
The use of AI does not transfer responsibility from the authors, editors, or reviewers to the AI system. Humans remain responsible for all decisions, statements, interpretations, and conclusions associated with the publication process.
14. Open Access and Copyright
JRAFS publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Under the CC BY 4.0 license, readers may share, copy, redistribute, adapt, remix, transform, and build upon the published material for any purpose, including commercially, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and source, a link to the license is provided, and any changes are indicated.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that third-party material included in their manuscripts is appropriately licensed or that permission has been obtained where required.
The use of the CC BY 4.0 license supports broad dissemination, reuse, and accessibility of the research published by JRAFS.
15. Editorial and Publisher Responsibilities
The publisher, Eldaghayes Publisher, supports the Editor-in-Chief and editorial team in maintaining the integrity, independence, and quality of JRAFS.
The publisher is responsible for supporting appropriate systems and procedures for:
Ethical publishing;
Double-blind peer review;
Research-integrity investigations;
Corrections and retractions;
Digital preservation and long-term access;
Protection of the scholarly record;
Transparency of publication practices; and
Appropriate journal infrastructure and editorial support.
Editorial decisions are made independently by the journal's editorial team on the basis of scholarly, scientific, ethical, and editorial considerations.
Commercial considerations, including advertising, article processing charges, or other financial interests, must not determine editorial decisions regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.
The publisher does not interfere with editorial decisions concerning individual manuscripts.
16. Editorial Independence
JRAFS maintains editorial independence in the assessment, peer review, and publication of manuscripts.
Editorial decisions are based on scientific quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, ethical compliance, and suitability for the journal.
Neither the publisher, authors, reviewers, advertisers, sponsors, nor other external parties may improperly influence editorial decisions.
The Editor-in-Chief has primary responsibility for editorial decisions, subject to the journal's established policies and procedures.
17. Peer Review Integrity
JRAFS follows a double-blind peer review model.
After an initial editorial assessment, manuscripts considered suitable for peer review are normally sent to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise.
The editorial team may consider additional reviewers when necessary, particularly where reviewers provide conflicting recommendations or specialized expertise is required.
The final editorial decision is the responsibility of the journal's editors and is not determined solely by the recommendation of an individual reviewer.
The journal reserves the right to reject manuscripts before or after peer review when ethical, methodological, scientific, authorship, plagiarism, or other serious concerns are identified.
Reviewer identities are normally kept confidential in accordance with the journal's double-blind review policy.
18. Post-Publication Integrity
JRAFS welcomes responsible post-publication communication concerning published articles.
Readers and researchers who identify a potential error, ethical concern, methodological problem, or significant issue affecting a published article are encouraged to contact the editorial office and provide sufficient supporting information.
The journal will assess credible concerns fairly and, where necessary, take appropriate action to correct, update, annotate, retract, or otherwise protect the integrity of the published scholarly record.
Authors are expected to cooperate with reasonable post-publication investigations and corrective procedures.
19. Data and Materials Integrity
Authors are responsible for maintaining appropriate research records and supporting materials underlying their published findings.
Where applicable and ethically permissible, authors are encouraged to make relevant datasets, protocols, code, research materials, or other supporting information available through appropriate repositories or supplementary files.
Authors must respect privacy, confidentiality, intellectual property, ethical restrictions, and applicable laws when sharing research data and materials.
Where data cannot be made publicly available for ethical, legal, privacy, or other legitimate reasons, authors should provide an appropriate explanation.
20. Citation and Reference Integrity
Authors are responsible for ensuring that citations and references accurately represent the sources used in their research.
Authors must not knowingly cite irrelevant publications solely to increase citation counts or influence journal metrics.
Editors and reviewers must not require authors to add citations solely to increase the citations of the editor, reviewer, journal, or affiliated authors.
Citation recommendations should be based on legitimate scholarly relevance.
The journal considers intentional citation manipulation to be a publication-integrity concern.
21. Confidentiality and Protection of the Scholarly Record
JRAFS maintains the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts throughout the editorial and peer review process.
Information contained in unpublished manuscripts must not be disclosed or used for personal, professional, or commercial advantage without appropriate authorization.
The journal is committed to preserving the published scholarly record and will take reasonable measures to ensure that published articles, corrections, retractions, and other editorial notices remain accessible and appropriately linked.
22. Commitment to Ethical Publishing
JRAFS is committed to maintaining a rigorous, transparent, fair, independent, and ethical publishing process.
The journal follows the ethical principles and relevant guidance of COPE and applies appropriate standards of research integrity to authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher.
Through its double-blind peer review process, research-integrity screening, ethical policies, open-access licensing under CC BY 4.0, and post-publication procedures, JRAFS seeks to protect the reliability, accessibility, and integrity of the scientific record in agriculture, food sciences, and related disciplines.
