Publication Ethics

The following terms are based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and apply to all parties involved in the publication of the World Conference on Qualitative Research Proceedings.
The Conference Proceedings are peer-reviewed. We take all measures to guarantee an ethical publication process, based on the following principles:

  • Double-blind review process: each of the submitted papers will be reviewed by at least 3 members of the Scientific Committee;
  • Exempt editorial process: ensuring that paper review is based exclusively on content quality, originality and scientific relevance, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, ethnic origin, or political philosophy of the authors;
  • Measures against any malpractice will be undertaken at any time, even after the publication, to detect, prevent and act on situations such as plagiarism; fabrication of research data; falsification or manipulation of existing research data; any other action that may compromise the quality and credibility of publication. WCQR reserves the right to use plagiarism detecting software to screen submitted papers.
  • Conformity to standards of ethical behavior is expected of all parties involved: Editors, Reviewers, Authors and the Publisher.
Publication decision
  • The editors are responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts should be published;
  • The editor may be guided by the policies of the editorial board and constrained by legal requirements regarding copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with other editors or reviewers in making this decision;
  • The editor can reject a manuscript without review in any of the following situations:
    • the paper does not meet the conference quality standards;
    • the paper is out of the conference’s scope (topics, themes, fields of application…);
    • they detect plagiarism, duplicate publication, simultaneous submission, research errors, fraud, research standards violations, conflicts of interest, reviewer bias or any other action that may compromise the quality and credibility of publication.
Fair play
  • The editors must ensure that paper review is based exclusively on content quality, originality, scientific relevance and overall academic merit, without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, citizenship, ethnic origin, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
  • The editors must ensure that information included in manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential;
  • The editors will not disclose any information about a submitted paper to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in editor’s own research without the author’s explicit written consent.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
  • Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may also assist authors in improving their manuscripts.
Promptness
  • Any invited reviewer who consider to be unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor and decline the invitation to review;
  • If an invited reviewer feels they are not able to complete the review of a manuscript within stipulated time, he/she should notify the Editor as soon as possible, not to compromise the review deadlines.
Confidentiality
  • Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be disclosed or discussed with others, except as authorized by the editor.
Objectivity
  • Review of submitted papers must be done objectively and the reviewers should support their assessment and recommendations clearly, with concrete arguments.
Acknowledgement of Sources
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation, as described in the Conference submission guidelines;
  • A reviewer should inform the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the paper under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
  • Reviewers who have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts should decline the invitation to review;
  • Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review must be kept confidential and not be used for the reviewer’s personal advantage.
Reporting standards
  • Submitted papers must follow the Conference submission guidelines;
  • Authors of submitted papers should present an accurate account of their original research, as well as an objective discussion of its significance;
  • Underlying data should be represented accurately. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and will not be accepted.
Data Access and Retention
  • Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in conjunction with the manuscript for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access to such data and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and Plagiarism
  • Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works;
  • Authors must acknowledge all sources of data used in their research and if they have used the work and/or words of others, ensure that this has been appropriately cited;
  • Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and will not be accepted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
  • Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one conference proceedings concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing same research in more than one conference proceedings.
Acknowledgement of Sources
  • Authors must acknowledge all sources of data used in their research and if they have used the work and/or words of others, ensure that this has been appropriately cited.
Authorship of the Paper
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors;
  • Other authors who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors;
  • The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
  • Authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript;
  • All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
  • If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their submitted paper, they must promptly notify the editor and cooperate with them to make all necessary corrections.