Entanglements
Journal of Posthumanities

Research Integrity

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Responsibilities of the Author

• Authors have the responsibility to ensure that their research is genuinely original and not plagiarised or very similar to work that is either already published or known to them as being in the process of publication.
• All co-authors are aware of the submission and have consented to publication.
• Proper acknowledgment is given to all contributors, including those providing intellectual, technical, or material support.
• Relevant funding sources, institutional affiliations, or supporting entities are credited.
• Authors are responsible for disclosing any competing interests at the point of an article’ssubmission, which will then be listed in the final published article. Failure to disclose competinginterests may result in the journal being unable to publish the article, even if it passes peerreview.A signed Conflict of Interest (COI) statement must be submitted before publication.
• Authors must endeavour to make all necessary revisions to their manuscripts following peer review feedback. If authors are not able to make the necessary changes to their article, this may result in the article’s rejection.
• If their article is accepted for publication, authors shouldbe amenable to copyediting queries and further suggested changes prior to the article’spublication.

• Authors cannot be added or removed at any point prior to publication unless an adequatereason is given to editors for why this is necessary.
• Unjustified addition or removal of authorswill be considered a case of malpractice and will not be tolerated by the journal.
• Require unanimous consent from all listed authors for any changes in authorship.

• Ghost Authorship – Omitting individuals who have made substantial contributions.
• Guest Authorship – Listing individuals despite minimal or no contribution.
• Gift Authorship – Adding individuals as a courtesy without meaningful

Violations may result in rejection, retraction, or further investigation

2. Responsibilities of the Editors

• An editor’s judgement must not be influenced by any organisation, agency, institution or government that is external to the journal and seeks to manipulate an editorial decision.
• Editors must always withdraw from overseeing editorial processes for an article for which they have any potential conflicts of interest.
• If any instance of competing interests compromises an editor’s position, the journal must assign editorial responsibility for the article to another editor.

• Editors must assess research without undue bias. They must base their decisions on the academic rigour of the research, the fit of an article with the journal’s scope, and the overall contribution of an article to its field.
• Editors must never discriminate against an author’s personal background, ethnicity, disability, religion, citizenship, political alignment, sexuality, gender or otherwise; such behaviour will not be tolerated by the journal or the publisher.

• Editors are responsible for ensuring that the established editorial policies of the journal are enacted at all parts of the workflow. If a problematic article falls outside the remit of established policies of the journal the editor holds the full right to reject the article.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

• The Journal believes that a double blind peer reviewsystem is the best way to maintain transparency and accountability in promoting original research. The reviewers are assigned articles without disclosing any details that give the editor a hint about the author’s identity.

• If a prospective reviewer has any reason to believe that they recognise and/or have any connection to the title, abstract, or content of the manuscript they have been assigned to review, they must immediately raise this with the journal’s editors.

• Reviewers must keep all details of the manuscript they are reviewing confidential.
• In the case of anonymous review, they must also ensure that potentially identifying details, such as name and publications, are not given in the review they provide.
• The ideas, arguments and written content of the manuscript must not be used by the reviewer for any purpose that constitutes personal gain, such as passing it off as their own research. This extends to reviewers who have declined to review but have seen part of the research, such as the abstract or manuscript title.

• Peer reviewers should let editors know as soon as possible if they require extra time to complete a review. If this is not acceptable, the editor may withdraw the invitation to review and seek another peer reviewer.
• Completed reviews should be returned promptly, at least within the deadline specified by the editor.
• Peer review reports should be structured clearly, with full explanations given for areas of the manuscript that need work.
• Personal and unduly harsh criticism of the author is inappropriate and should not be included in the review.
• If any of the above conditions occurs, the journal’s editors have the full right to seek another peer reviewer to undertake review of the article.
• In the case of anonymous review, peer reviewers should also not leave any identifying information in reports, such as their name, or indicating that their own publication(s) should be consulted. If such information is detected in anonymous peer review reports, editors must edit the report to remove the identifying text before the author sees it.
• Reviewers should conduct reviews with as much supporting evidence for their claims as possible, to avoid undue subjective bias.
• Any relevant sources that the author has failed to cite should be suggested where possible and an explanation of their relevance should be given.
• If a reviewer has concerns about the manuscript, such as plagiarism of or similarity to another’s work, they must contact the editors immediately with an explanation of their concerns.

4. Publication Process

• Manuscripts must be original and comply with journal submission guidelines.
• Simultaneous submissions to multiple journals are not permitted.
• Violations of ethical standards may result in editorial action.

• Originality: All submissions must be the author’s original work. If prior research is referenced, proper citation and acknowledgment are required.
• Permission and Acknowledgment: When using copyrighted material or ideas from other sources, authors must obtain appropriate permissions and give due credit.
• Copyright Responsibility: Authors are responsible for ensuring that their work does not violate copyright laws. The journal does not assume responsibility for any copyright infringements by authors.

• Authors must ensure that their submissions do not contain defamatory content or serve as promotional material. Work submitted to Entanglements should contribute to critical discourse without misrepresentation or bias.

• Entanglements up holds principles of inclusivity and equity. We do not tolerate gender, racial, linguistic, or any other forms of bias in submitted work. Authors are encouraged to use inclusive and respectful language in their submissions.

5. Steps Against Misconduct

• Retraction – Removing content with a formal public notice.
• Correction – Issuing a modified version with an explanation.
• Blacklisting – Barring authors from future submissions.
• Institutional Notification – Informing the author's institution of serious violations.

By submitting to Entanglements, authors agree to abide by these guidelines

6. Peer Review System

• Initial Assessment – The editorial team assesses scope and relevance.
• Reviewer Selection – Two or three experts evaluate anonymously.
• Detailed Review – Evaluates originality, theory, methodology, and contribution.
• Resolution of Disagreements – Conflicting reviews may be addressed by an additional reviewer or Chief Editor.
• Reassessment by the Reviewers – After the modification or corrections are done by the author according to the comments and suggestions by the reviewers the modified article is again assigned unanimously for reassessment for final decision.

This ensures rigorous academic and ethical standards while promoting fairness and transparency.