About the Journal
Publication Ethics for University of Nigeria Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication Studies
At the Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication Studies, we are committed to the integrity of our academic content and publishing process. Therefore, we encourage researchers to conduct their research work in line with best practices and code of conduct of relevant professional or international regulatory bodies.
We uphold the same high standards at the Interdisciplinary Journal of Communication Studies. As a result, we encourage our prospective contributors to consider and abide by the following principles:
- Intellectual honesty in all aspects of research;
- Painstaking thoroughness, accuracy and excellence in research practice;
- Communicating research report with transparency and integrity; and
- Care and respect for and protection of all participants in and subjects of research.
We are committed to ensuring the highest form of standard in the process through which contents are created and separated from simple data or information. The editorial process is interative and highly subjective. Our overall editorial procedures are presented as follows:
- We start a pre-check process following a submission. A submission will only be accepted for peer review when:
- the manuscript falls within the scope of the journal;
- the information regarding authorship is reliable;
- presentation meets our selection standards;
- required information regarding research ethics is included in the manuscript; and
- the manuscript does not potentially suffer plagiarism.
- In the case where a submission is not rejected, qualified and suitable reviewers will be contacted to peer-review it.
- Upon the completion of peer review and evaluation of reviewers’ comments, editors must decide on whether to accept, reject, or require authors to revise (i.e., major or minor revision) their manuscripts.
- Following authors’ revision, reviewers are once again contacted for a repeat of the review. Following this procedure, editors must either reject or accept the revised manuscripts.
- In any case, if a manuscript is eventually accepted, attention must be paid to lay-out editing, language editing, author proof reading, and format conversion before publication.
We recognize the invaluable role of peer review in the integrity of the scholarly record. The committee on publication ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers set out the basic principles and standards to which all peer reviewers should adhere during the peer-review process. Accordingly, we have outlined the basic principles to which our peer reviewers should adhere: These are:
- Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required to carry out a proper assessment and which they can assess in a timely manner
- Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of peer review and not reveal any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal
- Reviewers should not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to the disadvantage of others
- Reviewers should declare all potential conflicting interests, seeking advice from the journal if they are unsure whether something constitutes a relevant interest
- Reviewers should not allow their reviews to be influenced by the origins of a manuscript, by the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, or by commercial considerations
- Reviewers should be objective and constructive in their reviews, refraining from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments
- Reviewers should acknowledge that peer review is largely a reciprocal endeavour and undertake to carry out their fair share of reviews and in a timely manner
- Reviewers should provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise
- Reviewers should recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered a serious misconduct.
Any form of intellectual contribution to the development and completion of a research work has important academic implications. This also implies that authorship comes with responsibility and accountability for published work. As a result, in making a list of authors for a research work, prospective authors must be aware of the following:
- All papers submitted must contain contributorship statements. This must be done to avoid dishonest authorship attribution.
- Individuals with substantial contributions to the conception, design of the work, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data and drafting of the work or its revision must be listed as authors.
- The position of a corresponding author is not superior to other authors or collaborators; rather the corresponding author assumes primary responsibility for communicating with the journal during the manuscript submission, peer review, and publication process.
- For those individuals (e.g., data collector, data managers, professional writing assistants, etc.) whose contributions did not justify authorship, a short acknowledgement section should be made to highlight what they have done during the research endeavour.
Paper Preparation Template
The following template shall guide intending contributors:
Title: Manuscript titles should not be longer than 50 words. Titles should be as clear as possible.
Introduction/Background of the study: We discourage contributors from too many citations in the background. The introduction should merely set the stage for the study. If possible, justify in few words why the topic is relevant as well as why the study is worth conducting. Contributors may combine statement of the problem with the introduction or make it a sub-heading.
Objectives of the Study
The objectives should be clear with measurable variables. Contributors can then derive their research questions and hypotheses from the objectives.
We encourage contributors to be as detailed as possible. The focus is on empirical studies, which must show globality and currency.
We are very interested in the theoretical relevance of manuscripts. Contributors are encouraged to situate their studies within a theoretical framework, and show why the chosen theory (or theories) best anchors the study.
Contributions must be rich in methodology by adhering to the scientific standard of conducting studies. We cannot take methodologies of few lines like 10 lines. We require details. For example, issues like validity, reliability and consent must be addressed. For content analysis, we require intercoder reliability. It should be noted that methodology is not another name for literature review. Authorities can only be cited when absolutely necessary, for example, to justify why a specific method, sample size, sampling technique, population, etc. was chosen.
Data analysis: We are interested in high-level analysis. Therefore, contributors should combine both descriptive and inferential statistics. We discourage contributors from using only simple percentages in data analysis. Manual analysis is also discouraged as SPSS and other software for data analysis are preferred.
Qualitative Studies: We encourage intending contributors to also adopt qualitative methodologies. However, the scientific approach must be diligently followed. The sample size for qualitative studies must not exceed 35 persons in the cases of human elements.
Results should be presented in simple language. The discussion should be done in the light of the studies reviewed, the findings, as well as the theory used. The implications of the results should also be explained.
The conclusion should be treated with every seriousness. Here, the contributors should sum up the study and make a statement on the unique/compelling contribution of the study to knowledge or problem solution. Recommendations should be made in the light of such contribution.
UNIJOCS uses APA 6th Edition. We encourage contributors to use mostly citations from reputable journals. The minimum number of references is 25 out of which 20 must be from journals.
Plagiarism is an unethical behaviour which is unacceptable in any research work. A related unethical behaviour is referred to as self-plagiarism. In self-plagiarism, an author uses a substantial part of his/her previously published work without proper citations or referencing. This can range from modifying a previously published manuscript to publishing the same manuscript in more than one journal. In order to avoid this, we advise that authors avoid the following:
- Exact repetition of another person’s work without proper acknowledgement of the author or source;
- Rearranging, rewording or rephrasing another person’s ideas or work without proper citation or due acknowledgement of the author or source;
- Using other person’s ideas or work from the Internet to make an imitation of online sources;
- Using other author’s work as part of one’s own without clearly acknowledging the author.
Research with Humans or Animals
Research involving humans or animals must be reviewed and approved by a research ethics committee (IRB) prior to starting the study. The rights of study subjects or participants to privacy must be respected. Also, an informed consent of subjects who have agreed to participate in a research must be obtained. Authors should be reminded that informed consent is not merely a form that is signed, but it is a process in which the subjects or participants are made to understand the objectives, their roles, and the risks that the research poses.
Conflicts of Interest (COI) and Funding
One of our aims is to ensure that any of our issues is free from undue influence. Therefore, we expect that authors must declare the following:
- All financial COI with no time limits.
- Relevant non-financial potential COIs.
Libel, Defamation, and Freedom of Expression
By any means, we discourage any form of false publication or statements that harm the reputation of individuals, groups, and organizations. If any such situation arises, our legal team will act appropriately.
Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern
We encourage retraction, correction and expression of concern for papers that are published in our journal. A retraction may be initiated by our editors, or by the author(s) of the papers (or their institution). In rare cases, retraction is accompanied by apologies for the previous error and/or expressions of gratitude to persons who disclosed the error to the author. Expression of concern is also suggested in the same manner as in the case of retraction or correction.
Falsification, Fabrication, and Image Manipulation
We recognize that results of data collected or presented as images may be misleading if they are not adequately modified. In view of this, we advise that authors should be more critical in making decisions to modify data elicited in this form. We have reason to believe that a careful consideration of modifying such images is crucial to preventing falsification, fabrication, or misrepresentation of their results.
Fraudulent Research and Research Misconduct
In the event that we detect fraudulent research and or research misconduct by our author, our response will be to collaborate with the relevant editor(s), COPE, and other appropriate institutions or organisations, to investigate. Any publication found to include fraudulent contents will be retracted, or an appropriate correction or expression of concern will be issued.
Data and Supporting Evidence
We encourage authors to be open and transparent with the data code and materials used in the research process. Authors are therefore expected to supply accurate data and supporting evidence related to their research into a repository or storage location. The purpose of doing this is to ensure that we create access for others to understand, verify and replicate new findings from the data authors supplied.
For all enquiries relating to the integrity of our journal content, please contact email@example.com. All queries will be handled sensitively and as confidentially as possible within the scope of any necessary subsequent investigation. Thank you for your attention.