University of Hawai‘i Press, Journals Division
Publication Ethics Statement
There are standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publishing of scholarly journal articles: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, and the publisher. This publication ethics statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) provides resources for journal editors, peer reviewers, and authors on the topic of professional publishing standards at publicationethics.org. In addition to COPE, the following organizations have also collaborated to identify best practices for scholarly publications: the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).
The University of Hawai‘i Press (UHP) is committed to high standards of critical scholarly review and professional publishing judgment. Journals published by UHP are under the editorial direction of their independent editor or editors. It is the journal editors who make all decisions regarding the content published in each issue; they ensure the accuracy, completeness, and originality of each article published. UHP supports our journal editors and sponsors in their efforts to manage their journals ethically and transparently, while adhering to established editorial principles and practices in their disciplines.
Additional information about each journal’s author guidelines may be accessed by going to the journal home page on our website and clicking on the “Author Guidelines” tab.
The editors of each journal are responsible for selecting which articles will be accepted for publication. Each journal editor, with the assistance from their editorial board, create the policies and guidelines for their journal while abiding by legal requirements regarding plagiarism, libel, and copyright infringement. The editors may request assistance from other journal editors or reviewers when making their decisions.
The journal editors evaluate the content of each manuscript for appropriateness for the journal. Each manuscript is also evaluated for the intellectual content without regard to the author’s sex, race, ethnic origin, religious beliefs, or political philosophy.
Any unpublished materials which have been included within a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the original manuscript author.
PEER REVIEWER DUTIES
Each journal has a Peer Review Process in place which assists the editor in making editorial decisions about a manuscript’s quality and suitability for publication. The journal editor may provide manuscript authors with each peer-reviewer’s response, which can help authors in improving their manuscript.
Potential peer reviewers who do not feel qualified to review a manuscript, or believes that they will not be able to provide a prompt response, should notify the editor as soon as possible. The reviewer should be an impartial party with respect to the author(s) of the manuscript. It is important for reviewers to inform the journal editor, if they suspect, or are aware of, a conflict of interest which may include prior co-authorship, a close professional relationship, or a personal relationship.
All submissions received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared or discussed with others, except as permitted by the journal editor.
Manuscript reviews must be conducted objectively and without personal criticism of the author. Each Reviewer should express their views clearly and provide supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should also make the editor aware if they recognize a significant resemblance between the manuscript under review and any other published paper.
Any ideas or information obtained through peer review is considered privileged information and should be kept confidential. If a Reviewer has a professional or personal connection with any of the authors or institutions connected to the paper, they should inform the editor that a conflict of interest may exist.
The scholarly peer review process applies to original research articles only. Other types of scholarly content which regularly appear in scholarly journals such as book and media reviews, political reviews, dialogue, editorial commentary, and others, are not usually subject to the peer review process.
Additional information on Ethical Guidelines for Peer-Reviewers may be reviewed on the COPE website.
Each author listed on the manuscript should be limited to only those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of the research or study. Every person who has made a significant contribution to the paper should be listed as co-author. If there are others who have participated in a significant way to the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as a contributor. The corresponding author should review and confirm that co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved and agreed to submit the final version of the paper.
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be understood to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research project should also be properly acknowledged.
Authors of papers reporting on original research must provide an accurate description of the research/work performed and an objective discussion of its importance to the field. All evidence and supporting data should be represented accurately in the paper. Each manuscript should also include references that allow others the ability to reconstruct the argument. It is unacceptable to intentionally include inaccurate statements or fabricated data in the manuscript, which is considered unethical behavior.
Authors must guarantee that their submitted work contains no content that may be considered as libelous or as infringing in any way on the copyright of another party. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, it has been appropriately cited or quoted.
Authors are asked to provide the raw evidence and data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide access to such evidence (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) and should be prepared to retain such evidence and data for a reasonable time after publication.
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The journal editor will make every effort to process and evaluate submissions in a timely fashion. Should an author decide to submit the manuscript to another journal, he/she must request the journal editor to withdraw their manuscript from consideration.
Authors must properly acknowledge the work of others and should cite all publications that have been influential in determining their scholarly understanding of the subject of their paper.
Authors must sign a publication agreement in order for their accepted manuscript to be published in the journal. Each journal has its own publication agreement which will be provided to the author upon acceptance of their manuscript.
ERRORS IN PUBLISHED WORKS
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published paper, it is the author’s responsibility to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor and publisher to retract or correct their paper.
If the journal editor finds that a significant error has been published for which a correction needs to be made, and in cases where there is reason for concern about matters such as plagiarism, fabrication of research, duplicate publication, or failure to disclose conflicts of interest, the editor will review and resolve the matter in consultation with UHP. In all instances, the publisher (UHP) is committed to preserving the integrity of the scholarly version of record.
Revised December 3, 2021