Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Journal of Desert Research upholds recognized standards of publication ethics. This statement is informed by the relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the journal’s editorial practices. The journal is committed to research integrity, the prevention of misconduct, and fairness in peer review and publication. Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members are expected to comply with the following requirements.

1 Responsibilities of Authors

1. Originality and appropriate citation. Authors must ensure that their manuscript is original, has not been formally published elsewhere, and is not under consideration by another journal. Plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, redundant publication, and inappropriate fragmentation of research findings are prohibited. Ideas, methods, data, tables, and figures from other sources must be properly acknowledged. Necessary permission must be obtained for the use of copyrighted material. Related publications, preprints, or other publicly available material must be disclosed to the Editorial Office at submission.

2. Data integrity and verification. Authors must report methods, data, and results accurately, retain the original records and supporting materials, and provide them for verification upon reasonable request by the Editorial Office. Restrictions on data sharing and the reasons for those restrictions must be explained. Misleading image manipulation and selective reporting are unacceptable.

3. Authorship and contributions. Authors must have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the study, data acquisition or analysis, interpretation of results, writing, or critical revision of important intellectual content. All authors must review and approve the final manuscript and accept responsibility for their contributions and the integrity of the work. Providing funding, facilities, or general assistance alone does not qualify a person for authorship. The corresponding author must ensure that all authors agree to submission, authorship, and author order, and that contributions are reported accurately. Other contributors should be acknowledged with their consent.

4. Changes in authorship. The author list and order should be agreed before submission. To request the addition or removal of authors or a change in author order after submission, the corresponding author must submit the reasons for the change and written consent from all authors, including those being added or removed. Changes require approval by the Editorial Office. Authorship disputes arising after publication will be addressed through a correction or other appropriate procedure following investigation.

5. Conflicts of interest and funding. Authors must disclose financial, personal, or other interests that could influence the research or its evaluation and identify the sources of funding. The absence of conflicts of interest must also be declared. Funding information must be accurate. Where relevant, the role of funders in study design, data analysis, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit must be described.

6. Research ethics and compliance. Research must comply with applicable laws, regulations, and ethical requirements. Studies involving human participants, animal experiments, or other activities requiring ethical review must identify the approving body and approval information, with supporting documents provided when necessary. Required permits must be obtained for activities such as research on protected species, surveys in protected areas, and sample collection. Manuscripts must not disclose classified information or infringe intellectual property rights or personal privacy.

7. Integrity in submission and peer review. Buying manuscripts, having manuscripts written or submitted by third parties, falsifying author identities or reviewer information, and manipulating peer review are prohibited. Legitimate language editing must be based on a manuscript prepared by the authors and must not be used to alter the substantive research content. Authors recommending reviewers must provide authentic, verifiable identities and contact details and disclose any relevant relationships.

8. Cooperation with review and correction. Authors must respond carefully to reviewers’ comments, describe the revisions made, and provide reasons for not adopting specific recommendations. Important errors, omissions, or integrity concerns discovered in a submitted or published article must be reported promptly to the Editorial Office. Authors must cooperate with investigations and any necessary correction or retraction.

2 Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. Reviewers should accept an invitation only if they have the relevant expertise and can complete the review within the requested time. They should promptly inform the Editorial Office if the subject is outside their expertise, they lack sufficient time, or they cannot continue the review.

2. Reviewers must assess scientific quality, originality, methods, reliability, and clarity objectively and fairly. Comments should be supported by evidence and useful to the authors. Reviewers must respect differing academic views and avoid personal criticism or derogatory comments.

3. Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartial assessment, including collaborative, supervisory, competitive, or financial relationships with the authors. If a conflict of interest exists, reviewers must inform the Editorial Office and recuse themselves from reviewing the manuscript.

4. Manuscripts and review information must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not disclose them to unauthorized persons, delegate a review without permission from the Editorial Office, or use unpublished material for personal benefit. Reviewers must not disclose their own identities or those of other reviewers to the authors or unauthorized persons.

5. Suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, data irregularities, ethical concerns, or other misconduct must be reported to the Editorial Office with supporting evidence where possible. Reviewers must not disseminate unverified allegations to external parties.

6. Reviewers must not request citations unrelated to the research to increase citations to themselves, particular individuals, or journals.

3 Editorial and Publishing Responsibilities

Editors and editorial board members must base their assessments on academic quality and relevance to the journal, protect the independence, fairness, and confidentiality of peer review, disclose and avoid conflicts of interest, and address complaints and allegations of misconduct promptly. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the journal’s academic content and editorial decisions. The Editorial Office and publisher support the investigation of ethical concerns and maintenance of the scholarly record. Detailed responsibilities and manuscript procedures are provided under Editorial Policies and Responsibilities.

4 Identification and Handling of Misconduct

1. The journal prohibits plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate authorship, simultaneous submission, redundant publication, unethical research, and peer review manipulation. The Editorial Office may use similarity screening, expert assessment, and examination of original materials to identify concerns. A similarity score is one source of evidence and is not, by itself, a determination of misconduct.

2. Allegations received during manuscript processing or after publication will be examined. The Editorial Office may suspend processing, request explanations and supporting material from authors, and contact their institutions, funders, or other journals for assistance. Those concerned will have an opportunity to respond.

3. Depending on the nature of the issue, the evidence, and the outcome of the investigation, the journal may request revisions, reject a manuscript, publish a correction or an expression of concern, or retract an article. Relevant institutions may be informed when appropriate. Decisions are intended to protect the accuracy and reliability of the scholarly record, and records of the proceedings will be retained.

5 Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

1. Corrections. A correction will be published when an error in a specific part of a published article affects its accuracy, but its main findings and conclusions remain reliable. Verified errors in authorship, funding, or other important information may also be corrected. The notice will explain the changes and be linked to the original article.

2. Expressions of concern. When substantial concerns about reliability or research integrity remain unresolved because an investigation is ongoing or sufficient evidence is unavailable, the journal may publish an expression of concern. The journal will update readers on the outcome once the investigation has concluded.

3. Retractions. An article will be retracted when sufficient evidence establishes that its main findings or conclusions are unreliable because of serious error, fabricated data, or similar problems, or that it involves serious plagiarism, redundant publication without appropriate disclosure, unethical research, or a substantial compromise of the fairness of peer review. The retraction notice will identify the article, state the reasons and who is retracting it, and be linked to the original article in both directions. Retracted articles will normally remain in the scholarly record, with their retracted status clearly indicated on the article webpage and in the full-text files. The journal will consider removing content only in exceptional circumstances, such as legal requirements or serious privacy or safety concerns. In such cases, it will retain the necessary bibliographic information and provide an explanation.

6 Appeals, Complaints, and Discussion After Publication

Authors may appeal review comments or editorial decisions by sending a written appeal to the Editorial Office at the email address listed on the Contact us page of the journal’s official website. The appeal should specify the manuscript number and provide the reasons for the appeal and relevant supporting evidence. Complaints about publication ethics or editorial conduct may be submitted through the same channel. The Editorial Office will arrange review by persons without conflicts of interest, seek independent expert advice where necessary, and communicate the outcome to the appellant or complainant. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

Authors and readers are welcome to submit evidence-based academic comments on published articles. Depending on their academic value and the nature of the concerns, the Editorial Office may invite a response, publish a discussion, or initiate an investigation. Appropriate confidentiality will be maintained for complainants’ identities and submitted materials.

7 Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

Generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain responsible for all manuscript content. Use of such tools in writing, content generation, or research must be disclosed in the appropriate part of the manuscript, including the tool name and purpose. Tools used solely for routine spelling checks, grammar checks, or reference formatting do not require a separate declaration. AI tools used as research methods must be described in the Methods section in sufficient detail for verification. AI must not be used to fabricate data, images, references, or other research material.

Editors and reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, review reports, or other confidential material to external AI platforms that cannot safeguard confidentiality and data rights. AI must not be used as a substitute for editorial decision-making or reviewers’ professional judgment.