The Eduac Multidisciplinary Research Journal (EMRJ) is deeply committed to the integrity of scholarly publication and maintains the highest standards of publication ethics. We actively guard against any form of publication malpractice. To this end, EMRJ employs a rigorous, objective, and fair double-blind peer-review process for all submissions. We are dedicated to preventing conflicts of interest, whether actual or potential, between editorial staff, reviewers, and the materials under review. Any deviation from these ethical guidelines should be immediately reported to the Editor-in-Chief, who is committed to ensuring swift and appropriate resolution of any such issues.

Editorial Process

EMRJ strives to advance knowledge by publishing high-quality research across a broad spectrum of disciplines. Our commitment extends to editorial independence, diversity, and equity. We welcome submissions from researchers of all backgrounds and geographic locations. Upon receipt, manuscripts are assigned to editors for initial assessment. If a manuscript is deemed suitable for consideration by EMRJ, it is then subjected to review by at least two independent peer reviewers. The reviewers’ evaluations inform the Associate Editor’s decision regarding the recommendation for publication. Recommended manuscripts are subsequently forwarded to the Chief Editor for final approval.

EMRJ maintains a professional and respectful environment. Rude, disrespectful, or abusive communication directed toward our editors, staff, or other contributors to the publication process will not be tolerated. EMRJ reserves the right to take appropriate measures to protect individuals from such behavior, which may include withdrawing a manuscript from consideration or rejecting submissions containing offensive language or personal attacks.

Peer Review Process

Peer review, also known as refereeing, is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing. It involves subjecting an author’s research, scholarly work, or ideas to critical evaluation by experts in the same field. This process relies on a community of qualified experts capable of providing impartial and insightful assessments. The peer review process serves multiple crucial functions: it encourages authors to adhere to the established standards of their discipline, helps prevent the dissemination of unsubstantiated claims, biased interpretations, and personal opinions, and significantly increases the likelihood that weaknesses in a manuscript are identified and addressed. For both grant funding and publication in scholarly journals, peer review typically requires that the subject matter be novel and contribute substantially to the existing body of knowledge.

Reviewers and editors have a responsibility to provide constructive and timely evaluations of research papers, focusing on the significance of the contribution, the rigor of the analysis, and the clarity of the presentation.

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by two subject matter experts and one specialist in research methodology and statistics, who assesses the technical aspects of the research. Reviewers provide detailed feedback, identifying any weaknesses or problems and offering specific suggestions for improvement. The editorial board then evaluates the reviewers’ comments and makes a decision regarding the manuscript’s suitability for publication, communicating this decision, along with the reviewers’ comments, to the author(s).

Criteria for Acceptance and Rejection

A manuscript is accepted for publication when the following conditions are met:

  • It is endorsed for publication by at least two reviewers.
  • The author(s) have adequately addressed the reviewers’ comments and suggestions.
  • The research adheres to all applicable ethical standards and protocols, particularly those involving human or animal subjects.
  • The manuscript achieves a Similarity Index of no more than 10% in a plagiarism detection test and a Grammarly score of 95% or higher. If these criteria are not met, the manuscript will be returned to the author(s) for revision.

Reviewers provide explicit recommendations regarding the disposition of the manuscript, typically choosing from the following options:

  • Accept without revisions
  • Accept with minor revisions
  • Accept with major revisions
  • Reject with the option to resubmit
  • Reject

In situations where reviewers offer substantially conflicting assessments of a manuscript’s quality, the editorial board employs several strategies to reach a fair decision. If one review is positive and another is negative, the board may solicit one or more additional reviews to break the deadlock. In the case of a tie, the board may invite the author(s) to respond to the criticisms raised by a reviewer, allowing for a detailed rebuttal that may influence the final decision. If the editor remains uncertain after considering the rebuttal, the board may seek a response from the original reviewer. In rare instances, the board may facilitate communication between the author and a reviewer to clarify specific points. However, reviewers are never permitted to confer with each other, and the goal of this process is not to force consensus or to compel anyone to change their opinion. The ultimate decision rests with the editorial board, based on a careful consideration of all available information.

Comments on Published Articles

Eduac Multidisciplinary Research Journal (EMRJ) welcomes and considers submissions that comment on previously published articles. These comments undergo peer review, typically involving the original author (to assess the comment’s accuracy in representing the original work) and an independent reviewer. If a comment is accepted, the original author will be invited to submit a reply for publication alongside the comment. All standard EMRJ editorial requirements apply to comment submissions.

Peer Review Process

EMRJ’s editorial office manages the selection of peer reviewers. When a manuscript is received, the editor invites qualified scholars or experts to evaluate it. Reviewer identities are kept confidential from the authors. However, under specific circumstances, reviewer identity may be disclosed. Justifiable reasons for disclosing peer review information include providing evidence of peer review for university ranking/financial incentives or for regulatory bodies like the Commission on Higher Education during academic program accreditation. All requests for peer review results must be submitted in writing.

Authorship and Contributorship

By submitting to EMRJ, all authors affirm that their work represents their original contributions and is free from plagiarism, in whole or in part, from other sources.

EMRJ aligns with COPE’s definition of authorship, requiring both: (a) substantial contribution to the work and (b) accountability for the work and its published form, including revising the manuscript with significant intellectual content.

Corresponding authors must use their institutional email address during submission. All contributing authors must be declared at the time of submission, with their names, ORCID numbers, and affiliations listed on the cover page and submitted separately through the journal’s portal. Only individuals listed on the cover page at submission will be recognized as authors. Those who do not meet the authorship criteria may be acknowledged in the Acknowledgements section.

Plagiarism Policy

EMRJ utilizes plagiarism detection software (e.g., Turnitin) to review all submissions. A similarity index exceeding 10% will result in rejection or an opportunity for resubmission. If plagiarism is discovered post-publication, the procedures outlined in the Retraction Policy will be followed. Readers, reviewers, and editors are encouraged to report any suspected instances of plagiarism.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

EMRJ discourages significant overlap in publications. Limited overlap is permissible only when it demonstrably advances the field, has the explicit endorsement of the original publication, and appropriately cites the original source (following Cambridge University Press guidelines, Version 4.0, September 20, 2021).

Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

Authors are required to declare all potential conflicts of interest and any partial advantages connected to their research. EMRJ also mandates a funding statement. Editors and reviewers are similarly expected to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could compromise the impartiality or integrity of the publication process.

Transparency

EMRJ is committed to adhering to COPE’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing and encourages its publishing partners to do the same.

Retraction Policy

Retraction is the removal of a published article from the digital archive due to post-publication discovery of research fraud, plagiarism, or significant methodological errors that were not detected during the quality assurance process. A retraction is initiated by the editorial office following validation of third-party complaints related to these issues, but only after the author has been notified and given the opportunity to respond, adhering to due process.

Digital Preservation Policy

Digital preservation involves the systematic storage of electronic files in multiple formats and locations, including compact discs, cloud computing services (e.g., Google Drive), email accounts, and external hard drives. This strategy ensures data integrity and accessibility in the event of website failures or other unforeseen circumstances.

I. Policies and Procedures

A. Handling Complaints Regarding Published Content

The Eduac Multidisciplinary Research Journal (EMRJ) is committed to addressing complaints concerning published content. This includes, but is not limited to, allegations of:

  • Infringement of copyright or other intellectual property rights
  • Material inaccuracies
  • Libelous content
  • Unlawful materials

When a complaint is received, the journal will undertake a thorough investigation. This may involve:

  • Requesting substantiating evidence from all parties involved.
  • Making a good-faith effort to determine whether the material should be removed.

A decision not to remove material will indicate the journal’s assessment that the complaint lacks sufficient merit or that a valid legal defense or exemption may apply. Examples include fair use in copyright matters or the truthfulness of a statement in cases of alleged libel.

The journal will meticulously document its investigation process and the rationale behind its decision. If, after investigation, an author is found to have acted improperly, the article will be subject to the journal’s retraction policy.

B. Use of Human Subjects in Research

The EMRJ adheres to the highest ethical standards in research involving human subjects. Publication of research articles involving human participants is contingent upon verification that authors have fully complied with all applicable laws, regulations, and ethical guidelines for the protection of human subjects.

Specifically:

  • The research protocol must have received prior approval from an appropriate Ethics Review Board (ERB) or Institutional Review Board (IRB).
  • In cases where the research is deemed exempt from full review, the ERB/IRB must have formally designated the research protocol as exempt.
  • A Certificate of Approval/Exemption from the ERB/IRB must be submitted alongside the manuscript.

C. Research Authorization and Permits

Depending on the nature of the research, the following authorizations or permits must be submitted as attachments with the manuscript:

  • Studies Involving Human Subjects: Ethics Clearance from an ERB/IRB. If applicable, a permit from the National Commission on Indigenous People (NCIP) may also be required.
  • Studies Using Biological Materials (Genetic Manipulation or Introduction of Exotic Species): Biosafety Permit.
  • Studies Conducted on Animals: Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) Clearance or Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI) authorization.
  • Studies Conducted in Protected Areas: Gratuitous Permit from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

II. Publication Information

A. Frequency and Fees

The EMRJ is published bi-annually. Article submission is free of charge. There are no processing or publication fees for accepted articles.

B. Open Access and Copyright Policy

The EMRJ is committed to open access, believing that it facilitates greater global knowledge dissemination. Therefore:

  • All content is freely available to readers without subscription fees.
  • Permission to read, download, and print articles is not required from the publisher or authors.

The EMRJ is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

Authors retain copyright of their work while granting the publisher an exclusive publication right. Specifically, authors have the following rights:

  • To share their article in accordance with the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, provided that the publisher’s logo and a link to the version of record on the EMRJ website are included.
  • To retain patent, trademark, and other intellectual property rights (including research data).
  • To receive proper attribution and credit for their published work. (See https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/copyright#Author-rights for more information).

III. Appeals and Complaints

All appeals and complaints must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief of the EMRJ. These concerns will be addressed by the EMRJ Editorial Board. Please send emails to: editor@eduac.in.

IV. Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses provided on this journal site will be used solely for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be shared with any other party or used for any other purpose.

V. Sponsorship and Support

The EMRJ is sponsored and funded by the Center for Policy, Research and Development Studies of the Research Department of Library and Information Science, Nallamuthu Gounder Mahalingam College, Pollachi 642001. Contact number: 9788175456; Email: editor@eduac.in.