Publication Ethics

Open Access Policy

The International Journal of Social & Natural Sciences (IJSNS) is an open-access journal. All content is freely available to users without charge. Readers are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, as well as use them for lawful scholarly purposes—without prior permission from the publisher or authors.
This policy aligns with the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) definition of open access.

Licensing Policy

IJSNS, published by the Faculty of Education, Federal College of Education, is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution–Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).

All articles published in IJSNS carry a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits users to copy, share, redistribute, and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original authors and the source, in accordance with the terms of the license.

Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available through the journal’s Licensing and Copyright section.

Copyright & Licensing Policy

All articles published in the International Journal of Social & Natural Sciences (IJSNS) are open-access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
This license permits readers to copy, distribute, display, and adapt the published work for non-commercial purposes, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and to IJSNS as the publisher.

IJSNS allows authors to retain the copyright of their published manuscripts. Authors grant the journal a non-exclusive right to publish and archive their work under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license. Any reuse, remixing, or distribution of the content must:

  • Acknowledge the original authors,
  • Cite the source and publication details, and
  • Provide a link to the Creative Commons license.

Commercial use of published material is not permitted without prior written permission from the authors and the journal.

Publication Ethics Policy

  1. Editor’s Responsibilities

The Editor is responsible for maintaining the integrity, quality, and credibility of the journal. Key responsibilities include:

  • Ensuring the publication of high-quality research papers.
  • Promoting freedom of expression within cultural, legal, and ethical frameworks.
  • Upholding the integrity and credibility of research contributions.
  • Meeting the needs of authors and readers while maintaining ethical standards.
  • Issuing corrigenda, corrections, clarifications, or apologies where required.
  • Encouraging innovative ideas and suggestions from authors, reviewers, editorial board members, and readers to improve journal quality.
  • Applying blind peer review rigorously and transparently.
  • Promoting anti-plagiarism policies and ethical research practices among contributors.
  • Implementing and periodically updating the journal’s ethical and editorial policies.
  1. Editorial Board

The Editorial Board comprises national and international experts and is responsible for:

  • Maintaining the journal’s quality by selecting credible and relevant research work.
  • Supporting smooth journal operations and advising the Editor.
  • Providing constructive feedback on past issues.
  1. Fair Play and Impartiality

The Editor ensures impartiality in article selection and peer review:

  • Selection of manuscripts is based solely on academic and scientific merit.
  • Author identity, gender, race, ethnicity, religious belief, political affiliation, seniority, or institutional association is disregarded.
  • Reviewers are required to disclose any conflicts of interest.
  1. Confidentiality

The Editor ensures confidentiality throughout the submission and review process:

  • Author and reviewer identities are protected during double-blind peer review.
  • Manuscript details are shared only with reviewers and editorial board members.
  • Information about accepted papers is disclosed only with prior author approval.
  • Confidentiality of research participants is maintained, including personal details, images, or individual results.
  • Manuscript content remains confidential before publication.
  1. Editing and Formatting Guidelines
  • Clear guidelines are provided to authors regarding manuscript content, format, and referencing standards.
  1. Dealing with Misconduct

The Editor ensures ethical compliance and addresses potential misconduct:

  • Reviewers are encouraged to identify ethical concerns and research misconduct, including inappropriate design, incomplete consent, data manipulation, or plagiarism.
  • Plagiarism is objectively verified using Turnitin or similar tools.
  • The Editor may issue corrigenda, remove, or retract plagiarized articles discovered post-publication.
  1. Transparency
  • Authors may submit multiple papers, but only one as principal investigator per issue.
  • Editorial Board members are limited to one paper per issue, either as principal investigator or co-author.
  1. Conflict of Interest
  • Editors, reviewers, and board members must disclose potential conflicts of interest.
  • Editors will not handle manuscripts from authors or institutions with which they have conflicts.
  • A publicly updated list of financial, academic, or other conflicts is maintained for all editorial members.
  • Editorial decisions on manuscripts submitted by Editors are delegated to Associate Editors.
  1. Disclosure
  • Unpublished data from manuscripts may not be used without author permission.
  • Information received after peer review remains confidential.
  1. Publication Decisions
  • Manuscripts are selected based on relevance, quality, and academic merit.
  • Editorial decisions are based on professional standards and journal requirements.
  • Authors receive justification for rejection, which may include:
    • Out-of-scope content
    • Insufficient depth
    • Major design, analysis, or formatting errors
    • Ethical violations such as plagiarism or data falsification
  • Editors communicate decisions promptly and cannot reverse them for personal reasons.
  1. Procedure for Appeal
  • Authors may appeal decisions regarding:
    • Manuscript rejection
    • Ethical disputes or objections
    • Infringement of publication ethics
  • Appeals are reviewed according to established journal procedures.

Peer Review Policy

 

The International Journal of Social & Natural Sciences (IJSNS) is an online, open-access, free-of-charge, double-blind peer-reviewed journal. In the double-blind review process, both author and reviewer identities remain concealed throughout the evaluation.

The review procedure is as follows:

  • Initial Screening:
    The Editor and Associate Editors conduct a preliminary review to determine the manuscript’s relevance, quality of content, adherence to the journal’s thematic scope, presentation, and writing standards.
  • Peer Review:
    Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to two reviewers who have expertise in the relevant field. If the reviewers provide conflicting evaluations, the manuscript is forwarded to a third reviewer for further assessment.
  • Revision Process:
    Authors are notified of the reviewers’ comments and suggestions and are required to submit a revised version within the specified timeframe.
  • Editorial Decision:
    After receiving the reviews, the editorial team decides whether to accept, reject, or request further revisions, taking into account the reviewers’ feedback and overall quality of the submission.
  • Consultation with Additional Experts:
    When necessary, the Editor may seek input from subject specialists (anonymous experts) prior to the formal review. In such cases, the final editorial decision will be based on the expert’s recommendation.

Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers

Preamble

Peer review is a vital component of scholarly communication and an essential step in the publication process. It supports the Editor in making informed editorial decisions and enables authors to improve their manuscripts through constructive feedback. Reviewers therefore carry an ethical responsibility to perform their evaluations with professionalism, integrity, and diligence.

The quality, credibility, and reputation of a journal depend significantly on the rigor and fairness of its peer-review process. This process is built on trust, and reviewers must uphold ethical standards when fulfilling their role. Since many reviewers—particularly early-career scholars—may not have received formal training in peer review, it becomes important to clearly articulate these responsibilities.

In line with the expectations of the Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan, the following ethical guidelines outline the standards reviewers are expected to observe while offering their valued services.

  1. Suitability and Promptness

Reviewers should:

  • Inform the Editor promptly if the manuscript lies outside their area of expertise, and decline the review if they are unable to provide a qualified assessment.
  • Submit review reports within the specified timeline and act responsibly to ensure timely processing of manuscripts.
  • Notify the Editor immediately of any expected delays and propose an alternative submission date.
  • Avoid unnecessary delays in the review process, including prolonged timelines or requests for irrelevant additional data or information.
  1. Standards of Objectivity
  • Reviews must be conducted objectively, adhering to high scholarly, academic, and scientific standards.
  • All judgments should be clearly articulated, allowing editors and authors to fully understand the reviewer’s observations and recommendations.
  • Both reviewers and authors (in their rebuttals) should refrain from making unsupported claims.
  • While constructive criticism is acceptable, reviewers must avoid personal remarks or derogatory comments directed at the author(s).
  • Decisions should be based solely on the quality, originality, and contribution of the manuscript—free from personal, financial, professional, or ideological biases.
  1. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
  • Reviewers must not use any unpublished material from a submitted manuscript for their own research or personal advantage without explicit permission from the Editor.
  • Confidential data or ideas obtained during the review process must not be shared or exploited.
  • Reviewers should disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political, or religious factors.
  • If the manuscript under review overlaps with the reviewer’s own ongoing research, this must be declared immediately.
  • A reviewer who feels unable to provide an unbiased evaluation should decline the review and inform the Editor of the reason.
  1. Confidentiality
  • Manuscripts sent for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not discuss or share their content with others, except with Editorial authorization for professional consultation.
  • Reviewers are ethically prohibited from disclosing or publicly discussing any aspect of a manuscript prior to its publication without formal approval from the Editor.
  1. Ethical Considerations
  • If a reviewer suspects plagiarism or finds that the manuscript is substantially similar to another published or submitted work, they must inform the Editor and provide relevant citations.
  • If the reviewer believes that the data or results presented are fabricated, falsified, or otherwise unreliable, this should be reported confidentially to the Editor.
  • Any indication of unethical research practices—especially involving human participants (e.g., children, women, vulnerable groups, persons with disabilities, elderly individuals)—must be brought to the Editor’s attention.
  • If a manuscript appears to replicate prior work without proper acknowledgment or ethical justification, the reviewer should flag this for editorial investigation.

Originality

When evaluating the originality of a manuscript, reviewers should consider the following key elements:

  1. Contribution to Knowledge
  • Does the manuscript add new insights or contribute meaningfully to existing knowledge?
  • Are the research questions and/or hypotheses aligned with the stated objectives of the study?
  1. Structure and Presentation

If the manuscript does not follow the journal’s prescribed format, reviewers should note this in their report or consult the Editor. Exceptionally well-written papers may warrant leniency in formatting, whereas others may require restructuring. Reviewers should carefully examine:

  • Language and Expression:
    If the manuscript contains significant language issues that hinder comprehension, reviewers should document this concern and recommend professional editing. This is particularly important when the author(s)' first language is not English.
  • Originality of Data:
    Assess whether the data presented are original or reproduced from previously published studies. Manuscripts with original data should be given preference.
  • Clarity of Visuals:
    Illustrations—such as photographs, models, charts, images, and figures—must be clear and relevant. Any duplication or inconsistency between visuals and text (especially in the “Results” section) should be reported.
  • Statistical Analysis:
    Evaluate whether the statistical methods are appropriate, justified, and correctly applied.
  • Methodology:
    Ensure that the “Methodology” section demonstrates a clear understanding of the procedures, techniques, and tools used in the research.
  • Data–Findings–Discussion Alignment:
    Verify that conclusions are supported by the data. Unsubstantiated claims, conjectures, or interpretations that do not stem from the results are unacceptable.
  • Organization and Format:
    Assess whether the manuscript follows the journal’s standard structure and formatting guidelines.
  • Technical Accuracy:
    Check whether the manuscript is free from typographical, grammatical, or formatting errors.

Review Report

Reviewers are expected to prepare a clear, constructive, and comprehensive review report in accordance with the following guidelines:

  • Provide Explicit Comments:
    Observations must be clearly stated in the “Comments” section, as this is the portion shared with the author(s).
  • Use the Prescribed Review Form:
    Reviewers should complete the journal’s designated review form(s) for consistency and standardization.
  • Include a Brief Summary:
    The review report should begin with a concise summary outlining the reviewer’s overall assessment, decision, and key observations.
  • Maintain Professional Tone:
    Personal remarks about the author(s) must be strictly avoided. All comments should be courteous, respectful, and constructive.
  • Highlight Deficiencies Clearly:
    Any issues or weaknesses should be described in sufficient detail to help the Editor and author(s) understand their nature and significance.
  • Provide a Clear Recommendation:
    The reviewer should explicitly indicate one of the following:
    • Reject
    • Accept without revision
    • Needs revision

Each decision must be supported by a clear and logical justification.

  • Specify Required Revisions:
    Reviewers should list revisions precisely and may indicate their willingness to review the revised manuscript if requested by the Editor.
  • Editorial Authority:
    The final decision regarding acceptance or rejection rests solely with the Editor. Reviewers’ comments are advisory, and the Editor may seek additional opinions or request revisions before making the final determination.

Plagiarism Policy

The International Journal of Science & New Strategies (IJSNS) strictly follow the Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan Plagiarism Policy. All submitted manuscripts are subjected to plagiarism screening using Turnitin, and the acceptable similarity index must be less than 15%, excluding references.

Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable and may lead to rejection of the manuscript, disciplinary action, or sanctions as defined by HEC.

  1. Definition of Plagiarism

In accordance with HEC guidelines, plagiarism refers to the unauthorized use, close imitation, or reproduction of another author’s ideas, expressions, data, tables, figures, computer programs, or creative work without appropriate credit. It includes:

  • Verbatim or near-verbatim copying without citation
  • Improper paraphrasing
  • Citing sources incorrectly or without differentiating copied text
  • Use of another’s digital, artistic, computational, or creative materials without acknowledgment
  • Self-plagiarism, i.e., reusing one’s own previously published work without citation
  1. Purpose of the Policy

The purpose of this policy is to:

  • Build awareness among students, teachers, researchers, and staff about plagiarism
  • Ensure academic and research integrity
  • Provide a transparent procedure for handling allegations of plagiarism
  • Specify responsibilities and punitive measures for proven cases
  1. Applicability

This policy applies to all:

  • Students
  • Teachers
  • Researchers
  • Staff of educational and research organizations in Pakistan

Any individual submitting research, presenting work, or seeking academic or professional benefits using plagiarized material will be held accountable.

  1. Institutional Responsibility

All institutions are responsible for:

  • Informing their members about plagiarism and its consequences
  • Ensuring authors understand that they are individually and collectively responsible for submitted work
  • Implementing the HEC Plagiarism Policy
  • Ensuring that any co-author endorsing a publication shares responsibility

Failure to adopt and implement this policy may result in derecognition by HEC.

  1. Reporting of Plagiarism

Any allegation of plagiarism may be reported to HEC or to the concerned institution through:

  • Email
  • Post
  • Fax
  • Formal written complaint

The complaint must include:

  • Bibliographic details of the original and suspected plagiarized work
  • Copies of both documents (if available)
  • Any supporting evidence
  • Contact information of the complainant

Anonymous complaints may be dismissed at the discretion of the institution.

  1. Investigation Procedure

Upon receiving a complaint, the Vice Chancellor / Rector / Head of Institution shall:

  1. Constitute a Plagiarism Standing Committee, consisting of:
    • Three senior faculty members
    • A subject expert
    • A senior student (if a student is accused)
    • A nominee of HEC
  2. Provide terms of reference and confidentiality requirements to the Committee.
  3. Ensure that both the complainant and the accused are given the opportunity to present their stance.
  4. Facilitate all investigative procedures, including:
    • Similarity testing
    • Reviewing evidence
    • Seeking opinions from editors/referees
    • Consulting legal counsel if required

The committee must submit its findings within 60 days. The Competent Authority may take appropriate disciplinary actions or forward the case to HEC.

  1. Penalties for Plagiarism

Penalties depend on the severity and extent of plagiarism and differ for teachers, researchers, staff, and students.

     a) Teachers, Researchers, and Staff

Major Penalty (for extensive copying or major results copied):

  • Dismissal from service
  • Blacklisting from academic employment
  • Public notification of blacklisting

Moderate Penalty (for partial plagiarism or copying key results):

  • Demotion to a lower grade
  • Public notification of blacklisting

Minor Penalty (copying limited text without citation):

  • Warning letter
  • Suspension of research grants
  • Withholding promotions or increments
  • Debarment from supervising students or receiving funded programs

      b) Students

Penalties may include:

  • Expulsion or rustication from any Higher Education Institution
  • Relegation to a lower class
  • Failure grade in the subject
  • Academic fines
  • Written warning (for minor, first-time offence)
  • Withdrawal of MS/MPhil/PhD degree if plagiarism is discovered at any time
  • Debarment from scholarships, research funding, or academic awards

       c) Co-Authors

  • All co-authors listed on a publication are jointly responsible for plagiarism unless proven otherwise.
  • All journals must ensure authors sign a Plagiarism Declaration Form confirming originality.
  1. Additional Actions

If plagiarism is proven:

  • The plagiarized paper will be removed from the journal website while retained in the database for record.
  • The author must write a formal apology to the original author(s).
  • Unpublished manuscripts found plagiarized will be immediately rejected.
  • Editors may issue warnings where appropriate.
  1. Appeal Process

Accused individuals may submit an appeal or mercy petition to the Chairman HEC / Vice Chancellor / Rector within 30 days of the decision. The appeal must be decided within 60 days.

  1. Penalty for False Allegation

If the allegation is proven false or malicious, disciplinary action will be taken against the complainant by their parent organization.

References

[1] “ACM (Association of Computing Machinery) Policy on Plagiarism” (http://www.acm.org/pubs/plagiarism%20policy.html)

[2] “Academic Integrity Statement: Appendix1” (University of Southampton Calendar 2006/7) (http://www.calendar.soton.ac.uk/sectionIV/part8a.html)

[3] “Plagiarism from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/plagiarism).

Reviewer Policy

Digital Archiving Policy

The International Journal of Social & Natural Sciences (IJSNS) ensure long-term digital preservation of all published content. To safeguard the scholarly record and guarantee permanent accessibility, the journal utilizes the following trusted archiving systems:

PKP Preservation Network (PKP PN)

IJSNS participates in the PKP Preservation Network, which provides free, automated, and decentralized preservation of OJS journals. PKP PN ensures that all published articles remain accessible even in the event of data loss or other technical failures.

LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe)

The journal uses the LOCKSS system to allow participating libraries to create distributed, permanent archives of the journal. LOCKSS ensures the integrity, authenticity, and long-term accessibility of all published material.

CLOCKSS (Controlled LOCKSS)

IJSNS also uses the CLOCKSS system, which provides a secure, dark archive. In case the journal or its website is ever unavailable, CLOCKSS supplies open and perpetual access through its global network of libraries.

Article Processing Charge (APC) Policy

International Journal of Social & Natural Sciences (IJSNS) is an entirely free-of-cost journal. No article processing charges (APC), submission fees, or publication fees are required at any stage of the publication process.