Spectrum of Operational Research (SOR) is committed to responsible scholarly publishing and to maintaining high standards of research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, accountability, and professional conduct throughout the publication process.
Authors, editors, reviewers, Editorial Board members, Guest Editors, and the Publisher share responsibility for protecting the integrity of scholarly communication. All participants in the publication process are expected to act honestly, transparently, professionally, and in accordance with the journal's applicable editorial and publication ethics policies.
Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and transparency of the work they submit to SOR. Research methods, data, analyses, results, figures, tables, references, and conclusions must be presented accurately and must not be fabricated, falsified, manipulated, or intentionally misrepresented.
Authors must ensure that authorship accurately reflects substantive scholarly contributions, appropriately acknowledge the work of others, disclose relevant conflicts of interest and funding, provide required ethical approvals or informed-consent information where applicable, and comply with the journal's requirements concerning data, copyright, licensing, and the use of Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies.
Authors must not simultaneously submit substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal and must transparently disclose relevant previous dissemination or closely related publications where necessary to assess originality or overlap.
Editorial decisions must be based on the scholarly quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance, and suitability of submitted manuscripts for the journal, without inappropriate influence from commercial, personal, institutional, political, or other unrelated interests.
Editors must manage manuscripts fairly and confidentially, identify and appropriately manage conflicts of interest, select suitably qualified reviewers, and take reasonable steps to ensure that the peer-review process is independent, constructive, and consistent with the journal's policies.
The journal's principles concerning the independence of editorial decision-making are further described in its Editorial Independence policy.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based, and professionally expressed assessments within the agreed review period. They must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and decline assignments where they cannot provide an impartial and appropriately informed assessment.
Manuscripts and associated materials received for review are confidential. Reviewers must not use unpublished information, ideas, data, methods, or results obtained through peer review for their own advantage or for the advantage or disadvantage of another person or organization.
Further requirements concerning reviewer conduct, confidentiality, and intellectual property are provided in the journal's Peer Reviewer Conduct and Intellectual Property policy.
SOR expects relevant information concerning authorship, funding, competing interests, ethical approval, informed consent, data availability, previous dissemination, and other matters material to the interpretation or assessment of a manuscript to be disclosed where applicable.
Relevant financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared and appropriately managed in accordance with the journal's Conflict of Interests policy.
References should be selected on the basis of scholarly relevance and should accurately represent the literature necessary to support, contextualize, or critically evaluate the research.
Authors, reviewers, and editors must not engage in coercive, excessive, reciprocal, or otherwise inappropriate citation practices intended primarily to manipulate citation counts or bibliometric indicators.
Detailed requirements concerning citation manipulation and related integrity issues are provided in the journal's Publication Integrity policy.
Unpublished manuscripts and associated editorial and peer-review materials must be handled confidentially. Individuals who obtain access to such material through the publication process must respect the intellectual property and legitimate rights of the authors and other contributors.
Further requirements are provided in the journal's Protecting Intellectual Property policy.
Authors, editors, and reviewers must comply with the journal's requirements concerning the appropriate and transparent use of Generative AI and AI-assisted technologies. AI systems cannot assume authorship responsibility, and their use must not compromise confidentiality, research integrity, intellectual property, or accountability.
Detailed requirements and restrictions are provided in the journal's Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools policy.
Where credible concerns arise regarding possible research misconduct, publication misconduct, peer-review manipulation, breaches of confidentiality, or other unethical behaviour, the matter will be assessed in accordance with the journal's Procedures for Dealing with Allegations of Unethical Behaviour .
Complaints concerning editorial procedures or appeals against editorial decisions are handled separately under the journal's Procedures for Dealing with Complaints and Appeals .
Where an established concern affects an article that has already been published, any formal action affecting the scholarly record will be governed by the journal's Retraction and Correction Policies .
Responsibility for research integrity does not end when an article is published. Authors should promptly inform the Editorial Office if they identify a significant error or integrity issue in their published work and should cooperate with the journal in determining whether corrective action is necessary.
Editors and the Publisher will take reasonable steps to preserve the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record and to address credible concerns in accordance with the journal's applicable policies.
SOR seeks to maintain responsible publication practices consistent with relevant principles and guidance provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) .
