The "Journal of Higher Education Athletics & Innovation" is now the "Journal of Higher Education, Athletics, Labor & Innovation." Learn more About the Journal or visit the Archives to access the journals' publications.
Research Ethics Policy
Ethical Oversight
JHEALI adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, created by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
Ethical Authorship
Although there is no universal definition, authorship creates a record of attribution and establishes accountability and responsibility concerning the work. Therefore, authorship should be limited to and should not exclude those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, and execution of the paper.
For multiple Authors, please designate one Author as the “Corresponding Author.” This individual will be listed first and will be the primary point of contact with the Editors.
To avoid disputes over authorship attribution, it is helpful to decide at the start who will be credited as Authors and who as contributors. In the case of multiple Authors, each should be able to identify their specific contribution to the work. The award of authorship should reflect the amount of intellectual contribution. Those who have made limited contributions should be named in the acknowledgments section.
All Authors must agree to the article's publication and take public responsibility for the full content of their paper.
The Corresponding Author should ensure that all co-Authors of the work have approved the content of articles and presentations.
This content was adapted from the Committee on Publication Ethics, specifically the COPE Discussion Document: Authorship and How to Handle Authorship Disputes: A Guide for New Researchers.
Informed Consent
JHEALI requires Authors and researchers to conform to the Declaration of Helsinki and The Nuremberg Code. To conform to these standards, Authors must obtain signatory forms signed by all participants, Author(s), and researchers, and have said forms available upon request. If you have further questions on research ethics, please consult the COPE website or contact the Editors at info.jheai@gmail.com.
Peer Review Ethics
JHEALI believes that ethical publishing contributes to a stronger research community. Reviewers are encouraged to adhere to ethical guidelines throughout the peer review process, as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The COPE framework covers three categories of responsibility: confidentiality, objectivity, and diligence. Visit the COPE guidelines on their website to see their full ethical guidelines for Reviewers.
Peer review across the JHEALI journal portfolio generally follows a double-anonymous process with multiple Reviewers solicited. It is possible that a specific subject community prefers a certain type of review process, and there is also an increasing call for more transparency around the peer review process. Thus, please contact the journal's editorial office if you have questions about the peer review process used by the journal.
Peer Reviewers are external experts chosen by Editors to provide written opinions. Their aim is to assess and improve the scientific validity and significance of works submitted for publication. Author suggestions as to who might act as a Reviewer are often useful, but editors are not obligated to use those suggestions.
Editors and expert Reviewers must maintain confidentiality in assessing a manuscript, and this duty extends to Reviewers’ colleagues who give opinions on specific sections. Editors will require that Reviewers provide timely, honest, confidential, unbiased, and justifiable reviews. Editors will seek Reviewers with the appropriate subject expertise and an appropriate amount of time to complete a full review.
The submitted manuscript should not be retained or copied by peer Reviewers.
Reviewers play a critical role in supporting research integrity. If they suspect misconduct, they should write to the Editor in confidence. (See policy below on “Dealing with Misconduct.”)