Editorial Policies

Quick Navigation

 

Professional Conduct and Publication Ethics

INSTI Publishing is committed to the highest standards of professional conduct and adheres to the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). As part of this commitment, X-Disciplinarity maintains independent authority in evaluating the conduct of authors, editors, and reviewers in accordance with established policies and ethical principles.

In rare cases where published work is found to contain serious errors, ethical violations, or unreliable findings, the journal may issue a Correction, Expression of Concern, or Retraction. For detailed procedures, please refer to our full Retraction Guidelines, which outline the grounds, investigation process, and format of retraction notices.

Maintaining research integrity is a shared responsibility across our community of authors, reviewers, and editors. The following policies outline the responsibilities of each group in upholding these standards.

Roles and Responsibilities

Authors

Originality and Exclusivity

Manuscripts must represent original work and may not be submitted to more than one journal simultaneously. If related research is under review or consideration elsewhere, authors must inform the editorial office at the time of submission. Duplicate submission without disclosure is considered unethical.

Accuracy and Transparency

Research data must be reported truthfully, accurately, with sufficient detail to allow reproducibility. Results should not be overstated, selectively reported, or misrepresented in terms of significance or impact.

Authorship

All listed authors must have made a significant contribution to the research and must approve the final version of the manuscript. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring compliance with authorship criteria and for communicating with the editorial office. To ensure transparency and accountability, X-Disciplinarity requires that author contributions be disclosed according to the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). CRediT provides a standardized framework to describe each author's specific role (e.g., Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Writing – Original Draft, Supervision, Funding Acquisition). A complete description of all roles is available in the CRediT Taxonomy PDF . Guest, gift, and ghost authorship are strictly prohibited. Any manuscript found to involve such practices will be rejected or retracted, and the responsible authors may face a submission ban in X-Disciplinarity. Serious cases may also be reported to the authors' institutions.

Funding and Acknowledgments

Authors must disclose all sources of financial or in-kind support, including grants, institutional support, equipment, or professional services. Identifiers (e.g., grant numbers) should be provided where applicable. Additional assistance, such as statistical or editorial support, should be acknowledged transparently.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose all commercial or financial relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research (e.g., consulting fees, stock ownership, honoraria) within the past 12 months. If no conflicts exist, authors must state: "The author(s) declare no conflicts of interest."

Verification and Compliance

Submissions undergo both automated and manual checks to ensure completeness, accuracy of disclosures, and compliance with ethical standards. The editorial office reserves the right to request clarification or additional information during the review process. Withholding, misrepresenting, or falsifying required information may result in rejection of the manuscript, withdrawal after acceptance, restrictions on future submissions, or notification of the authors' institutions. In cases of serious misconduct, the journal may also issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Editors

Ethical Standards

Editors must adhere to the ethical guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Fairness and Non-Discrimination

Editors should evaluate manuscripts based solely on intellectual merit, without regard to authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, national origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves from handling any manuscript where a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest exists. Editors are prohibited from holding financial or managerial interests in third-party companies or institutions related to the subject matter.

Independence

Editorial decisions must not be influenced by commercial considerations, advertising, or pressure from institutions or sponsors.

Integrity of the Scholarly Record

All manuscripts will be screened for plagiarism prior to acceptance. Editors will also check for data fabrication, image or data manipulation, duplicate submissions, and manipulation of the peer review process. X-Disciplinarity reserves the right to issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions in accordance with COPE guidelines.

Confidentiality

Editors must protect the confidentiality of all submitted materials and reviewer communications, unless disclosure is required for the investigation of research misconduct.

Timeliness and Communication

Editors are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts are processed fairly, efficiently, and within reasonable timeframes, and for keeping authors informed of the editorial process.

Appeals and Complaints

The Board of Editor Director must handle author appeals and complaints in a transparent and consistent manner, following established journal procedures.

Reviewers

Ethical Standards

Reviewers must adhere to the principles of peer review outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Objectivity and Constructiveness

Reviews should be conducted impartially and based on scholarly merit. Feedback must be clear, respectful, and aimed at helping authors improve their work. Personal criticism of the author is not acceptable.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers may not share, use, or disclose any information obtained during the review process for personal or professional gain.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must immediately inform the editorial office of any conflicts of interest (e.g., recent or ongoing collaborations, direct competition, institutional affiliations, or financial/non-financial interests) and recuse themselves if independence cannot be maintained.

Timeliness

Reviewers are expected to respond to invitations promptly and to submit their reviews within the agreed timeframe. If unable to meet a deadline, reviewers should inform the editor as soon as possible.

Detection of Ethical Concerns

Reviewers should notify editors if they identify possible research misconduct, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or concerns regarding human or animal ethics.

Peer Review Policy

All submissions undergo an initial editorial review to ensure compliance with the journal's formatting and submission requirements, as well as relevance to the journal's scope. Manuscripts that are incomplete, contain major defects, or clearly fall outside the journal's scope may be rejected without external review. Authors whose manuscripts are returned for revision may resubmit, but must include a point-by-point response addressing all prior editor or reviewer comments. Failure to address these comments may result in rejection without further review.

Language quality is not a criterion for assessing scientific merit. However, if the clarity of language is so limited that it prevents editors and reviewers from properly evaluating the scientific content, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for revision prior to peer review.

The journal operates a single-blind peer review process, where reviewers remain anonymous but have access to the authors' identities.

Initial Editorial Review:

Each submission undergoes an initial review by the handling editor to assess overall quality, relevance, and adherence to the journal's scope. If the manuscript is suitable, it is assigned to an editor specializing in the appropriate technical subfield.

Reviewer Selection

The editor invites at least two independent, external reviewers to evaluate the manuscript.

Reviewer Timeline

Invited reviewers are expected to respond within two weeks. Once an invitation is accepted, reviews should be submitted within an additional two weeks.

Review Criteria and Outcomes

Reviewers provide constructive comments to help authors improve their manuscript. Recommendations may include acceptance without revision, minor or major revision, or rejection.

Editorial Decision

The editor evaluates the reviewers' recommendations and issues a decision letter. If revisions are required, authors must submit a detailed response addressing each reviewer comment.

Revision and Further Review

The editor may make a decision based on the revised manuscript and response or may send the revised version back to reviewers for further evaluation. The editor makes the final decision on acceptance or rejection.

Timeliness and Appeals

The journal strives to ensure that peer review is conducted in a fair and timely manner. Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting a reasoned request to the editorial office, which will be reviewed by the co-editor-in-chief, and/or editor-in-chief.

Artificial Intelligence Policy

The increasing availability of generative artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies is transforming how scientific work is written and communicated. While these tools may improve efficiency and readability, they also raise concerns about accuracy, accountability, transparency, and potential bias. To safeguard the quality and trustworthiness of the scholarly record, X-Disciplinarity follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and has established the following policy governing the use of AI technologies by authors, editors, and reviewers.

Authors

Permitted Use

Generative AI tools may only be used during the writing process to improve readability and language clarity. Their use in data analysis or research methods must be described in the Methods section, not the writing declaration.

Declaration of Use

Authors must declare any use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in the preparation of their manuscript at the time of submission.

Human Oversight

AI tools must be applied under human supervision and control. Authors are responsible for carefully reviewing and editing all AI-assisted content, recognizing that such tools may generate authoritative-sounding but incorrect, incomplete, or biased outputs. Authors remain fully accountable for the integrity, originality, and accuracy of their work.

Authorship

AI and AI-assisted tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship implies accountability, contribution, and responsibility that only humans can assume.

Mandatory Statement

A statement disclosing the use of generative AI and AI-assisted tools in the writing process must be included at the end of the manuscript at the time of submission. If present, it will appear in the published article in a separate section before the references.

Editors

Confidentiality and Integrity

To protect author rights and ensure confidentiality, editors may not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, or similar tools) in the editorial decision-making process or in any part of the manuscript evaluation workflow.

Future Developments

The journal is actively monitoring developments in responsible AI tools. This policy may be updated in the future to allow the use of technologies that demonstrably comply with confidentiality and ethical standards.

Reviewers

Confidentiality and Integrity

To protect author rights and maintain confidentiality, reviewers may not use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies (e.g., ChatGPT, Copilot, or similar tools) in the peer review process, including reading, analyzing, or drafting reviewer comments.

Special Policy: Hazards, Human, and Animal Experimentation

Hazards

Manuscripts must clearly identify any chemicals, procedures, or equipment that pose inherent hazards during their use. Authors are required to describe the safety precautions taken.

Human Subjects

Manuscripts must include a statement confirming that all procedures involving human participants were conducted in accordance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines, and that the appropriate ethics committee approved the study. Authors must state that informed consent was obtained from all human subjects, and the privacy rights of participants must always be respected. Research involving humans must conform to the principles of the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki.

Animal Subjects

Manuscripts must include a statement confirming that all animal experimentation complied with internationally recognized standards, including the ARRIVE Guidelines. Authors must also demonstrate compliance with applicable national regulations, such as:

Patient Consent and Identifiable Information

When case details, images, or other personal information of patients or individuals are included, authors are required to obtain written consent, permissions, or releases. Authors must retain copies of consent forms and provide them to X-Disciplinarity upon request.

Back to top