Political Economy Quarterly

Political Economy Quarterly

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

 

Ethics in publishing

To promote research integrity and ethics among the scientific community, we, the Editorial Board of Political Economy Quarterly，hereby issue a statement on publication ethics and academic misconduct in compliance with relevant state and international policies and regulations. With a rapid proliferation of research work, it is more important than ever that we continue promoting a healthy ecological environment for fair, equal, and open academic exchange, which has been vital for the robust development of sciences.

Authors must be honest in presenting their results and conclusions of their research. Research misconduct is harmful for knowledge. It could mislead other researchers.

Copyright

All manuscripts must be submitted through the online submission system. Authors are required to click “Agree” on the Journal’s Copyright Agreement displayed on the submission platform before completing the submission process.

Subscribers may reproduce tables of contents or prepare lists of articles including abstracts for internal circulation within their institutions. Permission of the publisher is required for resale or distribution outside the institution and for all other derivative works, including compilations and translations. If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article.

Role of the funding source

Authors are requested to identify who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article and to briefly describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement, then this should be stated.

Articles access

1. Online First

The journal is published by Tsinghua University Press Co., Ltd. Online first via CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure).The journal offers rapid publication via CNKI’s Online First service.

2. Subscription

Articles are made available to subscribers via SciOpen, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and National Center for Philosophy and Social Sciences Documentation.

Peer review

This journal adopts a double-blind peer‌ review process. Simultaneous submissions are not accepted. Manuscripts with contents outside the scope will not be considered for review. Papers deemed suitable are then typically sent to a minimum of two independent reviewers to assess the scientific quality and judge the merit of the paper for publication. In addition, editors will have the option of seeking additional reviews if needed. Authors will be informed when editors decide that further review is required. The editor-in-chief makes the final decision. Authors may track manuscript progress via the submission platform. The rejected papers will be notified promptly. All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents. and we expect our handling editors and reviewers to treat all submissions as confidential material as well. Editors and reviewers involved in the review process should disclose conflicts of interest resulting from direct competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, and remove oneself from cases in which such conflicts preclude an objective evaluation. Privileged information or ideas that are obtained through peer review must not be used for competitive gain. Our peer review process is confidential, and identities of reviewers cannot be revealed.

 

Duties of editors

1. Publication decisions

The editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding issues such as libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making these decisions.

2. Fair play

The editorial policies of the journal should encourage transparency and complete, honest reporting, and the editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. The editor shall use the journal’s standard electronic submission system for communications.

The editor shall establish, along with the publisher, a transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions.

3. Journal metrics

The editor must not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. In particular, the editor shall not require that references to that (or any other) journal’s articles be included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editor’s own articles or products and services in which the editor has an interest.

4. Confidentiality

The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editor may share limited information with editors of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

5. Declaration of competing interests

Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing prior to the appointment of the editor, and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such declarations in the journal.

The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to products or services in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journal’s usual procedures, peer review must be handled independently of the relevant author/editor and their research groups, and there must be a clear statement to this effect on any such paper that is published.

Duties of authors

1. Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

2. Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide research data supporting their paper for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication.

3. Originality and acknowledgement of sources

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate context within the larger scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.

4. Confidentiality

Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

5. Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

6. Changes to authorship

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the journal editor. To request such a change, the editor must receive the following from the corresponding author: (a) the reason for the change in author list and (b) written confirmation (e-mail) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed.

7. Notification of fundamental errors

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.

Duties of reviewers

1. Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.  Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

2. Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.

Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewing exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor in order to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3. Alertness to ethical issues

A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

4. Standards of objectivity & competing interests

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Academic misconducts

Academic misconducts refer to the behaviors violating to academic codes and ethics, and generally includes fabrication, falsification and plagiarism. (a)Fabrication: Making up research data and results, recording or reporting them in any formal academic exercise. (b)Falsification: Manipulating research materials, images, data, equipment, or processes. Falsification includes changing or omitting data or results in such a way that the research is not accurately represented. (c)Plagiarism: Deliberately uses others’ work or makes certain changes in the form or content without permission, credit, or acknowledgment. Plagiarism takes different forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing someone else’s work and can include data, words and phrases, and ideas and concepts. The manifestations are plagiarism, forgery, tampering, improper authorship, multiple submissions, duplicate publication, salami slicing publication, and violation of relevant research ethical issues.

To uphold academic integrity, all submitted manuscripts are automatically screened using plagiarism detection software through the online submission system. This ensures originality and helps prevent any potential overlap with previously published content.

In the event that the journal's publisher or editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, they will handle the case with diligence and integrity. All allegations will be reviewed thoroughly and confidentially, in accordance with COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines. The concerned parties may be contacted for clarification, and institutional cooperation may be sought where appropriate.

The journal reserves the right to take corrective action in response to substantiated misconduct, including issuing retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern. Such actions are taken to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the academic record.

Article Retraction and Correction Policy: In cases where significant errors, ethical breaches, or research misconduct are identified post-publication, the journal will issue appropriate corrections or retractions. Retractions will be issued when findings are unreliable due to misconduct or honest error. Corrections will be made for minor issues that do not invalidate the research. All notices of correction or retraction will be linked to the original article and made freely accessible.