Publication Ethics & Research Integrity.

Authors warrant that submitted manuscripts represent authentic, original scholarly work that has not been previously published in any peer-reviewed format, conference proceedings, or book chapter. Concurrent submission to multiple journals is strictly prohibited.

Where a manuscript builds substantially upon prior working papers, conference abstracts, or published dissertations, authors must transparently cite the preceding work, disclose overlap during submission intake, and clarify the novel empirical or conceptual contribution of the current text.

Authorship credit must be grounded in substantive intellectual participation. An author must satisfy all four established ICMJE/COPE criteria:

Individuals who provided funding, proofreading, lab facilities, or generalized supervisory oversight without direct conceptual contribution should be recognized in an Acknowledgments section rather than listed as co-authors. "Gift", "guest", or "ghost" authorship constitutes academic malpractice.

Plagiarism in any manifestation—including verbatim copying without attribution, inadequate paraphrasing, uncredited adaptation of visual diagrams or datasets, and self-plagiarism (redundant text recycling without citation)—is unacceptable.

All submissions are subject to routine computerized similarity indexing and editorial cross-verification. Manuscripts exhibiting unauthorized reproduction or deceptive attribution will be summarily rejected and may prompt institutional notification.

Authors maintain ultimate responsibility for the veracity and provenance of all reported empirical observations, statistical models, mathematical proofs, and interview transcripts. The falsification, fabrication, selective trimming, or deceptive curation of primary data is grounds for immediate rejection or post-publication retraction.

Authors should be prepared to provide anonymized raw data, interview coding structures, or econometric code matrices to the editorial board upon reasonable request during the review process for verification purposes.

Transparency is paramount to preserving reader confidence in published scholarship. All participants in the publication process—including authors, referees, section editors, and the Editor-in-Chief—must declare any financial, commercial, consulting, institutional, or personal connections that could bias or appear to influence the research.

Manuscripts must include an explicit funding statement identifying grant numbers, institutional sponsors, corporate patrons, or declaring that no dedicated external funding was received.

Investigations involving human subjects, qualitative field interviews, organizational surveys, or employee observations must strictly adhere to the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Authors must confirm that formal Institutional Review Board (IRB) or institutional ethics committee approval was granted prior to empirical data gathering. Research involving proprietary enterprise data must carry formal written organizational release or complete corporate anonymization to prevent unauthorized disclosure.

Large language models, generative AI platforms, and algorithmic co-pilots do not satisfy criteria for authorship because they cannot assume legal, moral, or authorial accountability for research integrity, copyright adherence, or factual truth. AI systems may not be credited as authors or co-authors.

Where generative AI tools have assisted in code synthesis, conceptual brainstorming, automated literature discovery, or linguistic polishing, authors must explicitly disclose this in an "AI Usage Disclosure" statement within the manuscript methodology, naming the tool, version, and extent of assistance utilized. Human authors bear uncompromised responsibility for every assertion, calculation, citation, and conclusion presented.

To maintain the integrity of the permanent scientific archive, the Journal follows standardized COPE guidelines when handling post-publication concerns:

• Corrigendum / Erratum: Published when a minor, inadvertent error (e.g., typographical mistake, mislabeled figure axis) is recognized that does not compromise the paper’s fundamental conclusions.
• Expression of Concern: Issued by the Editor-in-Chief when substantiated allegations of misconduct or data ambiguity are under active institutional investigation.
• Retraction: Enacted when peer evidence establishes data fabrication, pervasive plagiarism, duplicate publication, ethical breach, or profound methodological invalidity. Retracted papers remain publicly visible in digital archives marked with watermarks and a clear statement of retraction.

The Journal maintains strict operational separation between editorial decision-making and business, institutional, or sponsorship functions. All editorial decisions—desk acceptances, referee assignments, revision requests, and ultimate publication approvals—rest exclusively with the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board.

Commercial considerations, publication fee payments, institutional pedigree, or commercial relationships with Grazing Minds Research will never influence peer-review rigor or publication decisions.