The Editors will:

 

• strive to meet the needs of readers and authors;
• constantly improve the journal;
• actively seek the views of readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members about ways to improve the journal’s processes;
• ensure the quality of the published material;
• facilitate freedom of expression;
• maintain the integrity of the academic record;
• publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed; and
• have processes and procedures for managing their own conflicts of interest as well as those of authors, reviewers, and editorial board members.

 

Relations with Authors

 

• The editors ensure that articles and survey articles are reviewed by suitably qualified referees in a fair and unbiased manner.
• Articles are peer reviewed by two to three reviewers using a double-blind process.
• Authors receive a detailed report on reviewer comments within two months of review.
• Upon receipt of reviewers’ comments, suggestions, and requests for changes necessary for publication, authors are asked to address all comments and suggestions by the reviewers in the resubmitted article.
• Editorial decisions to accept or reject an article for publication are based only on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the remit of the journal.
• Authors should acknowledge all sources used in research and cite publications that have been influential in their research work.
• Authors are requested to disclose research funders and their role in the research funded.
• The editors respect authors’ decisions that particular individuals should not review their articles, if these requests are practicable and well-reasoned.

 

Relations with Reviewers

 

• Reviewers will receive guidelines on what is expected of them.
• All peer reviewers’ identities are blind and protected.
• Reviewers are requested to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
• Reviewers are informed to the best of our knowledge on who has funded the research and on the role of the funders in the research.
• Reviewers will not be approached where a conflict of interest is detected.
• We encourage reviewers to comment on the originality of the submissions, be alert to redundant publications, and help us detect plagiarism.

 

Complaints

 

• Complaints and concerns will be immediately addressed by investigating the validity of the complaint and taking appropriate steps.

 

Encouraging Debate

 

• The editors encourage scholarly discussion and debate. Cogent criticisms of published work may be addressed and, depending on length, such comment(s) may be published as a follow-up article. (Note: The Journal of World Philosophies does not have a “letters to the editor” column.)

 

Encouraging Academic Integrity

 

• We aim to ensure that research material published conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
• Authors are requested to sign a Consent to Publish Agreement, and when accompanied by images, a permissions agreement for illustrations and artwork must be submitted as well. Submissions will not be published without these documents.

 

Pursuing Misconduct

 

• If misconduct is suspected, before taking the matter further we will first seek a response from those accused.

 

Ensuring the Integrity of the Academic Record

 

• When it is recognized that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement, or distorted report has been published, we will endeavor to print a correction promptly and with due prominence.
• If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, we will ensure that the retraction is clearly identifiable to readers, aggregators, and indexing systems.

 

Committee on Public Ethics (COPE)

For the process for dealing with complaints against editors referred to COPE, please see page 3 of the COPE Code of Conduct: http://publicationethics.org/files/2008%20Code%20of%20Conduct.pdf