Spectrum of Operational Research (SOR) takes all credible concerns relating to research and publication ethics seriously. Suspected unethical behaviour, research misconduct, or publication misconduct may be reported to the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Office, or Publisher at any stage of the submission, peer-review, editorial, publication, or post-publication process.
Concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, publishers, funding organizations, or other interested parties. Reports should provide sufficient information to allow the journal to understand and assess the concern and, where available, should include relevant documentation or supporting evidence.
Ethical concerns may be assessed regardless of when they are identified, including concerns relating to previously published articles.
All credible allegations will be assessed according to their nature, seriousness, and the available evidence. The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately appointed independent editor will normally conduct or oversee the initial assessment.
Where an editor has an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest concerning the manuscript, individuals involved, or circumstances of the case, that editor will not participate in the assessment or decision-making process. The matter will be assigned to an appropriate independent editor or other suitably qualified individual.
The journal may request additional information, documentation, underlying data, source files, code, correspondence, ethical approvals, authorship documentation, declarations, or other materials reasonably necessary to evaluate the concern.
Information relating to an allegation will be treated confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and will normally be shared only with individuals or organizations whose involvement is necessary for the appropriate assessment or resolution of the matter.
Individuals whose conduct or work is the subject of a substantive allegation will normally be informed of the relevant concern and given an appropriate opportunity to respond before the journal reaches a conclusion or takes substantial editorial action, except where legal, regulatory, confidentiality, or other compelling considerations require a different approach.
The journal will seek to distinguish between honest error, differences in scholarly interpretation, minor breaches of publication standards, questionable research or publication practices, and potentially serious misconduct. Any editorial action will be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the concern and the evidence available.
Potential unethical behaviour may include, but is not limited to:
The general ethical responsibilities applicable to authors, editors, Guest Editors, reviewers, and the Publisher are defined in the journal's Publication Ethics Statement .
Minor concerns may include limited or inadvertent breaches of publication standards that do not materially compromise the integrity or reliability of the research, editorial process, or scholarly record.
Depending on the circumstances, such concerns may be addressed through clarification, guidance, correction of information, or a formal warning. The journal may request that an author, reviewer, editor, or other participant remedy an identified issue or comply with the journal's applicable policies and standards.
A concern may be considered serious where the available evidence indicates deliberate, systematic, repeated, or materially consequential misconduct, or where the reliability or integrity of the research, peer-review process, editorial process, or scholarly record may be substantially compromised.
Serious concerns may require additional expert assessment, consultation with relevant institutions, or referral to an appropriate research integrity, professional, regulatory, funding, or other competent body.
SOR will assess matters that fall within its editorial responsibilities. However, the journal does not normally have the authority or resources to conduct formal institutional investigations of research misconduct requiring access to employment records, laboratory records, institutional documentation, confidential administrative information, or other evidence unavailable to the journal.
Where appropriate, the journal may refer a concern to an author's, reviewer's, or editor's institution, employer, research integrity office, funding organization, regulatory authority, professional body, or other competent organization and may request that the relevant body investigate the matter.
The journal may take into account the findings of an institutional or other competent investigation when determining what editorial action is appropriate.
Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern and the stage at which it is identified, SOR may request clarification or supporting information, require appropriate corrective action, suspend editorial consideration, reject a manuscript, replace a reviewer, transfer a manuscript to an independent editor, terminate a review or editorial assignment, refer a matter to an appropriate institution or competent body, or take other proportionate measures necessary to protect the integrity of the editorial process and scholarly record.
In cases involving established serious or repeated breaches of publication ethics, SOR may also consider proportionate restrictions on future submissions, reviewing activities, or editorial involvement for a defined period. Such measures are editorial in nature and are distinct from formal determinations of research, employment, academic, regulatory, or legal misconduct made by institutions or other competent authorities.
Where an established ethical or integrity concern affects an article that has already been published, formal action affecting the scholarly record will be taken in accordance with the journal's Retraction and Correction Policies .
Detailed requirements concerning corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, article removal, and related changes to the scholarly record are defined in that policy and are not repeated here.
Formal complaints concerning editorial procedures, peer review, editorial conduct, journal administration, or appeals against editorial decisions will be handled separately in accordance with the journal's Procedures for Dealing with Complaints and Appeals .
A complaint or appeal concerning an editorial decision is distinct from an allegation of research or publication misconduct. Where a complaint raises a substantive ethics concern, the matter may also be assessed under this policy and the relevant specific SOR policy.
Where an allegation concerns an editor who would normally be responsible for handling the matter, that editor will not participate in its assessment or decision-making. The concern will be assigned to an independent editor or another appropriately qualified individual without a relevant conflict of interest.
Where a concern involves the Editor-in-Chief, it may be referred to the Publisher, an independent senior editor, or another suitably qualified person who was not involved in the matter.
Where a concern involves the Publisher, the matter should, where reasonably possible, be considered by an appropriate independent person or editorial representative who was not directly involved in the circumstances giving rise to the allegation.
Individuals who raise ethical concerns in good faith should not be subjected to retaliation by the journal. SOR will seek to protect the confidentiality of individuals raising concerns to the extent reasonably possible and legally permissible.
Knowingly false, malicious, or deliberately misleading allegations may themselves constitute inappropriate conduct and may be addressed accordingly. This provision is not intended to discourage legitimate concerns raised in good faith.
Specific ethical and publication-integrity matters are governed by the following journal policies:
In assessing suspected unethical behaviour and determining appropriate editorial action, SOR will consider relevant guidance and recommendations provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) .
Each case will be evaluated according to its individual circumstances, the evidence available, and the journal's applicable publication ethics policies and procedures.
