Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets

Research and Publishing Ethical Standards of Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets

Ethical research and publication standards are an essential building block in the development of a coherent and honest scholarly and scientific knowledge.  To assure the highest quality and integrity of research the Journal of Marketing and Consumer Behaviour in Emerging Markets follows international standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the process of publishing: the author(s), the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer(s) and the publisher. Each of the parties have their responsibilities and related duties, which help to achieve the highest ethical standards.  


Responsibilities and Duties of Authors

Reporting standards: Authors reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. Therefore all data for a specific paper should be retained for a reasonable time after publication [5].

Research misconduct: Authors are obliged to avoid any form of research misconduct i.e.: Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them [10].
(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. [10]
(c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit [10]. Plagiarism takes different forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing some else's work and can include[5]:

  •  Data copying
  •  Words and Phrases copying or paraphrasing
  •  Ideas and Concepts of others attributed as your own.

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. Plagiarism has varying different levels of severity, such as:

  •  How much of someone's work was taken–a few lines, paragraphs, pages, the full article? Is it literal copying, substantial copying, paraphrasing Or text re-cycling?.
  •  What was copied–results, methods, or introduction section?

JMCBEM actively checks manuscripts for plagiarism via online software (

Simultaneous Publication, and Duplicate/ Multiple Publication, Salami slicing : Authors have an obligation to make sure their paper is based on original–never before published–research. Intentionally submitting or re-submitting work for duplicate publication is considered  a breach of publishing ethics [5].

Simultaneous submission occurs when a person submits a paper to different publications at the same time, which can result in more than one journal publishing that particular paper [5].

Duplicate / multiple publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross-reference, share essentially the same hypotheses, data, discussion points, and/or conclusions.1 This can occur in varying degrees: literal duplication, partial but substantial duplication, or even duplication by paraphrasing [5]

Salami slicing involves breaking up or segmenting a large study into two or more publications [5]. These segments are referred to as "slices" of a study[7]. Complex studies should be presented as a ‘cohesive’ single whole, they should not be partitioned into individual papers. Furthermore, if there is any doubt as to whether a paper submitted for publication represents fragmented data, authors  should enclose other papers (published or unpublished) that might be part of the paper under consideration[7]. As a general rule, as long as the "slices" of a broken up study share the same hypotheses, population, and methods, this is not acceptable practice [5].


Instances in which dual publication may be acceptable: The following types of “prior publication” do not present cause for concerns about duplicate or redundant publication [4]:

  • Abstracts and posters presented during sessions at conferences.
  • Results presented at meetings (for example, to inform investigators or participants about findings).
  • Results in databases (data without interpretation, discussion, context or conclusions in the form of tables and text to describe data/ information).
  • Dissertations and theses, including those  in university archives.
  • Re-publication of a paper in another language is acceptable, provided that there is full and prominent disclosure of its original source at the time of submission [13]. For example, if the author(s) included the results of their research in a publication in a local language with weak dissemination, they may resubmit their study in the JMCBEM provided that their paper would be of interest to our readers who would probably not otherwise be aware of the other publication.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Acknowledge properly all source materials or data used in the research and presented in the manuscript.

Authorship: Assure that all persons listed as authors meet criteria for Authorship of the manuscript.

Authorship should be based on the following four criteria [4]:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
  3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

All those designated as authors should meet all four criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria should be identified as authors. Those who do not meet all four criteria should be acknowledged [4], e.g. as contributors or commentators of research.

Authors collaborating on multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary work may have different and perhaps non-overlapping areas of expertise. However, authors should still be able to stand “accountable” for ensuring investigation and resolution of “questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work.”[4]

By these criteria, acquisition of funding alone, collection of data alone, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship. Also, each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. This also applies to all authors designated within large multi-author groups and for on those occasions when authors report work on behalf of a larger group of investigators[4].

If the paper is an effect of work of several researchers, than the authors should consider  the following general guidelines, which may vary from field to field:

  • The order of authorship should be "a joint decision of the coauthors"[3].
  • Individuals who are involved in a study but don't satisfy the journal's criteria for authorship, should be listed as "Contributors" or "Acknowledged Individuals". Examples include: assisting the research by providing advice, providing research space, departmental oversight, and obtaining financial support [3].
  • For large, multi-center trials, the list of clinicians and centers is typically published, along with a statement of the individual contributions made. Some groups list authors alphabetically, sometimes with a note to explain that all authors made equal contributions to the study and the publication [5]


Three types of authorship are considered unacceptable [5]:

  • "Ghost" authors, who contribute substantially but are not acknowledged (often paid by commercial sponsors). Listing names of people who took little or no part in the research, omitting names of people who did take part [5].
  • "Guest" authors, who make no discernible contributions, but are listed to help increase the chances of publication;
  •  "Gift" authors, whose contribution is based solely on a tenuous affiliation with a study [5].

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:  All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest. Authors are obliged to report any potential conflicts of interest at the time of submission to the JMCBEM in the Submission Declaration Form.

“A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain). Perceptions of conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest.”[14]

Any interest or relationship, financial or otherwise, that might be perceived as influencing the author’s objectivity is considered a potential source of conflict of interest. These must be disclosed when directly relevant or indirectly related to the work that the authors describe in their manuscript [4]. Potential sources of conflict of interest include but are not limited to patent or stock ownership, membership of a company board of directors, membership of an advisory board or committee for a company, and consultancy for or receipt of speaker’s fees from a company [4]. The existence of a conflict of interest does not preclude publication in the JMCBEM.

If the authors have no conflict of interest to declare, they must also state this at submission.

Fundamental errors in published Works: Author(s) discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her/their own published work, are obliged to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper [5].


Responsibilities and Duties of Editors

Publication decision: Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication are based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the remit of the JMCBEM[1]. Publication decision about acceptance  is final, but may be reversed if serious problems are identified with the submission.

Timing of publication: Editors are responsible for ensuring timely peer review and publication and should avoid unnecessary delays. Editors are obliged to share information with authors about any delays that occur[4].

Fair play: Editors are responsible for setting consistent and fair standards of peer review process and selection of submitted manuscripts.

Editors of the JMCBEM apply consistent standards in their peer review processes, including for special issues or supplements, and where peer review has been managed process.

Editors or board members are not involved in editorial decisions about their own scholarly work when they are authors or have contributed to a manuscript which has been submitted to the JMCBEM.


Assurance of the highest quality of review process:  To create an efficient, effective peer-review process, editors of the JMCBEM:

  • encourage reviewers to comment on ethical questions and possible research, publication misconduct raised by submissions (e.g. unethical research design, inappropriate data manipulation and presentation) and the originality of submissions and to be alert to redundant publication and plagiarism [1].
  • establish and maintain a secure database of suitably qualified peer reviewers that is compliant with data protection legislation. This database is updated on the basis of performance of peer reviewers for quality and timeliness [1]. Peer reviewers who repeatedly produce poor quality, tardy, abusive, or unconstructive reviews will not be used again.
  • consider giving authors the option to nominate peer reviewers or to request that particular individuals do not peer review their paper [4]. However, authors should avoid nominating peer reviewers who have a conflict of interest.
  • give peer reviewers explicit guidance on their role and responsibilities, and consider encouraging the use of reporting guidelines to check completeness of reporting in a systematic way [4].
  • may suggest that authors acknowledge the contribution of reviewers to the JMCBEM[1].

Confidentiality: Editors are responsible for ensuring confidential handling of manuscripts, with no details being disclosed to anyone except the peer reviewers without the permission of the author. If discussions between an author, editor, and peer reviewer have taken place in confidence they should remain in confidence unless explicit consent has been given by all parties, or unless there are exceptional circumstances (for example, when they might help substantiate claims of intellectual property theft during peer review) [4].

Editors are responsible for ensuring that all those who carry out peer review on behalf of the journal understand and adhere to the need for confidentiality relating to the peer-review [4].

Disclosure and Conflicts of interest: Editors should ask author(s) at submission and peer reviewers to disclose any conflicts of interest. Reviewers should do this when they respond to an invitation to review and also when they submit their review (since conflicts may only be identified after reading the manuscript).

Editors should ask that reviewers decline invitations where circumstances might prevent them writing an unbiased review.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations: To manage investigations (e.g. research misconduct, publication problems, conflicts of interest, etc.) editors should refer to the flowcharts from COPE.


Responsibilities and Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decision: Reviewers are expected to provide an objective and constructive explanation for their recommendation. To assure this the reviewers should:

  • provide journal with personal and professional information that is accurate and a true representation of their expertise [15].
  • 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 [15].
  • notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice [15].

Promptness in preparing the reviews: Reviewers should prepare a review  within a reasonable timeframe, and not delay publication.

Confidentiality: Reviewers should respect the confidentiality of peer review, and not discuss  any details of a manuscript or its review, during or after the peer-review process, beyond those that are released by the journal.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviewers are expected to:

  • avoid 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.[15]  
  • avoid requesting that the author cites the peer reviewer’s own papers, unless there is a strong scholarly or scientific rationale for this.
  • not use insulting, hostile, or defamatory language. 
  • not reproduce information or any part of the manuscript under review in any of their own work prior to publication by the authors.
  • not use information obtained during the peer-review process for their own or any other person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others [15]
  • not delegate peer review.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:  Reviewers are obliged to declare any potential conflicts of interest. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include when they have collaborated with the authors recently, when they are based in the same institution as the authors, when they are in direct competition with the authors, when they have personal conflict or close personal relationship or association with the authors, or when they have a financial interest in the manuscript.


Responsibilities and Duties of the Publisher

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. To achieve high ethical standards we are a member of CrossRef and CrossCheck.

Manuscript checking is done using iThenticate which provides plagiarism prevention services to publishers around the world.



[1] Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).( 2011) Code of Conduct and Best Practice for Journal Editors. Accessed: 12.12.2015

[2] Committee on Publication Ethics(COPE). (2011) Code of Conduct for Publishers.  Accessed: 12.12.2015

[3] International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors Accessed: 12.12.2015

[4] Wiley .( 2014) Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics: A Publisher's Perspective, Second Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[5] Elsevier. (2012). Ethics in Research & Publication. Brochure Accessed: 12.12.2015

[6] Office of Research Integrity ORI. Ethics of Peer Review: A Guide for Manuscript Reviewers, from the US Office of Research Integrity ( Accessed: 12.12.2015

[7]  Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Salami Slicing (i.e., data fragmentation)  Accessed: 12.12.2015

 [8] Office of Research Integrity (ORI) guidelines ‘Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing’ Redundant and Duplicate (i.e., dual) Publications Accessed: 12.12.2015

[9] Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Policy on Plagiarism. Accessed: 12.12.2015

[10] Office of Research Integrity ORI. Definition of Research Misconduct. Accessed: 12.12.2015

[11] Chris Graf , Lisa Deakin , Martine Docking , Jackie Jones , Sue Joshua , Tiffany McKerahan , Martin Ottmar , Allen Stevens , Edward Wates , and Deborah Wyatt. (2015). Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics: A Publisher’s Perspective, 2nd Edition Accessed: 12.12.2015

[12] Scott-Lichter D and the Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. (2012). CSE’s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications, 2012 Update. 3rd Revised Edition. Wheat Ridge, CO: 2012. Available at: Accessed: 12.12.2015

[13] Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), 1999, Guidelines on good publication practice. Accessed: 12.12.2015

[14] International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Conflicts of Interest Form. Accessed: 12.12.2015

[15] Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), 2013, Ethical Guidelines for Peer

Reviewers, Accessed: 12.12.2015




Open Access Agreement

The JMCBEM Publisher requires authors wishing to make their article open access to sign an Open Access Agreement providing for the article to be made available under one of the Creative Commons Licenses in order to meet the terms of open access publication and ensure the widest possible dissemination. The license is currently displayed on, The Creative Commons website explains how these license works.



Copyright transfer agreement

The copyright transfer agreement can be accessed here.

EFMD Global
Uniwersytet Warszawski
HR Excellence in Research
Eduniversal ranking
Ministerstwo Nauki
Polska Komisja Akredytacyjna

© Copyright: Wydział Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego

ul. Szturmowa 1/3, 02-678 Warszawa
tel: +48 22 55 34 002, fax: +48 22 55 34 001; mail:

NIP: 525-001-12-66


Administratorem strony jest Sekcja Informacji i Promocji WZ UW



projekt: VisualTeam Logowanie dla pracowników