Journal of Academic Research for Humanities (JARH) is a double-blind peer-review, Open Free Access, online Multidisciplinary Research Journal
Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Ethical Guidelines and Journal Policy

The Editor-in-Chief of a research journal plays an important role in establishing and maintaining professional standards. Publication of a paper in an HEC-recognized journal is expected to be a reflection of the quality work of the author (s) and the affiliating institution (if any). The Editor is expected to perform the responsibility towards the journal in all aspects and at varied stages i.e. from receiving an article to publishing it. Keeping this in view, it becomes the prime responsibility of the editor to adapt the following guidelines while publishing papers in his/her research journal. 


1. The Editor’s Jurisdictions are

  • Establishing and maintaining the quality of the journal by publishing quality papers in his/her journal.
  • Promotion of freedom of expression within the cultural, constitutional/legal framework,
  • Providing integrity and credibility of the research contributions,
  • Meeting the needs of authors and readers,
  • Maintaining ethical standards of the journal,
  • Providing corrigendum for any correction, clarification and apologies where required.


1.2 Good practices would include to: 

  • Encourage new ideas and suggestions from authors, peer reviewers, members of the editorial board and readers to improve the quality of his/her journal,
  • Apply the process of blind peer review in true letter and spirit,
  • Promote innovative findings in the respective field and publish them on priority,
  • Promote anti-plagiarism policy,
  • Educate contributors (authors) about ethical practices in research, and
  • Implement the journal’s policy without institutional pressure and revise the policy from time to time.


1. Formation of Editorial Board  

  • The Editor-in-Chief must ensure that the Editorial Board comprises prominent scholars of the field who can adequately promote the journal,
  • The Editorial Board comprises and is responsible for the following:
    • An Editorial Board/Committee, will be responsible for providing logistics, and
    • The Advisory Board/Committee will be responsible for reviewing the submitted research articles, this committee should have at least 50% representation of scholars from abroad.
  • May appoint Editorial Board members for a prescribed duration and add or revise the constitution of the Board if required,
  • The Editor will inform new board members about ethical guidelines and their expected role and update the Editorial Board members about development, challenges and any changes made in the journal policy,
  • The Editorial Board will maintain the quality of the journal because an assigned category by the HEC (e.g. W, X, Y, and Z categories) will depend on the quality of published papers in it. It is the professional duty of the Board members to select credible research work, and
  • To ensure the smooth functioning of the journal, the Editors are responsible for conducting the Editorial Board meetings regularly (at least twice a year).


2. Fair play and Impartiality

  • The criteria for the selection of research papers is impartial and the Editor selects academically and scientifically sound articles through section editors' suggestions, The Editor will: 
    • Promptly respond to the author (s) of the papers submitted for publication, and
    • Assign a specific number to an article submitted for processing; and pay impartial consideration to all research papers submitted for publication.
  • To ensure evaluation of the content of research papers impartially and disregard the discriminating factors, e.g. gender, race, ethnicity, religious belief, cultural sentiments, political affiliation, seniority and/or institutional association of the author(s) while selecting articles for publication,
  • To ensure impartiality of the review process by informing the reviewer (s) that s/he needs to disclose any conflicts of interest regarding the submitted research paper.


3.    Confidentiality

  • The Editor ensures confidentiality of the author(s) and reviewers during the process of double-blind peer review,
  • Information about a research paper will not be disclosed by the Editor to anyone except the author(s), reviewer(s), and editorial board members,
  • Upon reaching a decision about a research paper, only the Editor discloses or announces the title of the study and the name of the author(s) that has been accepted for publication. Any other information may only be disclosed with the prior approval of the author(s), and
  • Confidentiality of the participants of the research also be ensured by protecting personal information (e.g. identifiable personal details, images, and/or individual results). The editor declares clear guidelines to the contributors (authors) regarding the confidentiality of the individual participant.
  • Before publication, the content of the manuscript will be kept confidential, both the Editor and reviewer(s) will not share or use any part of the work.

4. Editing and Formatting Guidelines

  • The Editor prepared clear guidelines about preparing and formatting a paper and printed these guidelines in each issue of the journal,
  • The guidelines cover information related to 'the content' and 'format' of a research paper,
  • APA's preferred manual of style is declared as a policy decision.

5. The Review Process

  • The editor ensures that all published papers have gone through a double-blind peer review, and at least two of the reviewers are from outside the corresponding author’s country.
  • The Editor ensures that peer review is masked in both directions and as such the identity of the author is removed from the manuscript before its review to protect confidentiality and privacy.
  • The Editor provided complete guidelines to reviewers, including necessary information about the review process and provided them with a reviewer comment form for recording his/her comments on the website.
  • The Editor ensures that the peer review process is prompt, nondiscriminatory and highly professional.
  • The Editor develops a system of confidentiality of research papers undergoing the review process.
  • The Editor sends reviewers' comments to the author(s) promptly and ensures that the corrections suggested by the reviewers are incorporated by the author(s) in true letter and spirit.
  • The Editor to critically evaluate peer review practices regularly and make improvements, if required.
  • The Editor maintains a database of competent and qualified reviewers. For this purpose, s/he may use various sources other than personal contacts to identify new reviewers (e.g. referring by author (s), citations and references section in a book/journal), and
  • The Editor refers troublesome cases (e.g. in case of one acceptance and one rejection or any conflict arising after review) to the Advisory Committee to resolve the matter amicably.


6. Dealing with Misconduct

  • The Editor encourages reviewers to comment on ethical issues and possible research and publication misconduct (e.g. inappropriate research design, incomplete detail on participant's consent, data manipulation, and presentation).
  • The Editor encourages reviewers to comment on the validity of the submitted research paper and identify the 'subtle (simply copy-paste)' and/or 'blatant (paraphrasing)' type of plagiarism, if, practised by the author(s).
  • The Editor confirms plagiarism (carries out objective checks through Turnitin) and
  • The Editor is prepared to publish a corrigendum and remove and retract a plagiarized article if it comes to his/her knowledge after its publication.

7. Transparency

  • The Editor ensures that multiple papers as a principal investigator submitted by an author should not be published in the same issue.
  • Only ONE co-authorship is allowed for those authors who also contribute a research paper as a principal investigator in the same issue.
  • For the members of the Editorial Board (including the Editor), it will only be limited to ONE paper per issue either to submit a research paper as a principal investigator or co-author, and
  • The Editor adopts an authorship or co-authorship policy that will set an example in the scientific community and strictly discourage any misconduct (e.g. forcible inclusion of a name in the author list). Authorship should only be given to those individuals who have substantially contributed to the said article.

8. Conflict of Interest

  • To ensure unbiased review, the Editor declared a clear-cut policy announced in 7 topics of this policy for his/her submission and a research paper submitted by an Editorial Board member,
  • In case of the article (s) submitted by the Editor or Section Editor or Editorial Board, the decision about the submitted article/s, one other Associate/ Section Editor takes responsibility for the evaluation of the article and information about reviewers is kept confidential.


9. Disclosure

  • The Editor does not use any unpublished information/data from the submitted research paper without the permission of the author(s), and
  • Any information received after the peer review process is kept confidential and not used for personal gains.

10. Publication Decisions

  • The Editor only shortlists research papers which have relevance to the scope of the journal clearly stated in the Journal, using his /her judgment, but without any personal bias.
  • After completion of the reviewing process, the submission of the revised manuscript, and assessing the quality and validity, the Editor has a right to accept or reject a research paper.
  • The Editor's decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication are based purely on merit, academic standards and professional demands of the journal.
  • The Editor justifies the reason (s) for rejecting a research paper to the author(s). This may include:

■ Failure to fit in the scope of the journal (may be communicated after preliminary review)

■ Insufficient depth of content

■ Major errors related to design, analysis, write up and format

■ Any misconduct or conflicting factors (e.g. plagiarism, copyright infringement, legal issues, fake data, authorship issues)

  • The Editor timely communicates the editorial decision to the author(s),
  • The Editors do not reverse decisions in favour or against the author(s) on their own.

11. Establishing a Procedure for Appeal

  • An appeal can be submitted to the Editor and the decision of the Editor will be final and non-challengeable on the:

■ The rejection of a research paper.

■ Objections to publications causing harm to any party.

■ Infringement of Ethical boundaries in any manner.                                                             

12. Advertisements

JARH does not accept advertisements of any kind.