Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

Intellectual Economics is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, editorial independence, and transparency.

The journal's editorial policies are guided by the Core Practices and relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Suspected breaches of publication ethics or research integrity are evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Where appropriate, the journal may seek clarification from authors, reviewers, institutions, funders, or other relevant parties and may take corrective action in accordance with applicable publication-ethics guidance.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the reported research and who accept responsibility for the work. All individuals who meet the journal's authorship criteria should be listed as authors. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be acknowledged where appropriate.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that:

  • all listed authors have approved the final manuscript;
  • all authors agree to its submission;
  • the author list accurately reflects contributions to the work;
  • relevant conflicts of interest and funding sources are disclosed.

Guest authorship, gift authorship, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Any addition, removal, or reordering of authors after submission must be justified in writing and approved by all affected authors and the Editor-in-Chief.

Where appropriate, authors may be asked to provide information on individual author contributions, including through recognised contributorship frameworks such as CRediT.

Generative AI systems and other AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship and must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

Originality, Plagiarism, Text Recycling and Duplicate Publication

Manuscripts submitted to Intellectual Economics must represent original scholarly work. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is not permitted. Duplicate and redundant publication must be disclosed and may constitute grounds for rejection or other editorial action.

Submitted manuscripts are screened for textual similarity using Turnitin before publication and, normally, before external peer review. A similarity score alone does not establish plagiarism. Similarity reports are evaluated by the editorial team in context, taking account of appropriate quotations, references, standard methodological language, previously published material, and the nature and extent of textual overlap.

Where problematic overlap is identified, the journal may:

  • request revision and appropriate citation;
  • reject the manuscript;
  • request an explanation from the authors;
  • take post-publication corrective action if the problem is identified after publication.

Serious cases of plagiarism, unattributed reuse, duplicate publication, or other forms of research misconduct may be referred to the authors' institution or another relevant body where appropriate.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

Authors must provide an accurate and honest account of their research, methods, data, analyses, and results. Fabrication, falsification, manipulation, or deliberate misrepresentation of data, evidence, findings, sources, or research procedures constitutes serious research misconduct.

Where credible concerns arise, the journal may request supporting documentation or data, seek clarification from the authors, reject the manuscript, publish a correction or other post-publication notice, retract the article, and/or contact the relevant institution where appropriate.

Research Ethics and Ethical Oversight

Research involving human participants, personal or sensitive data, surveys, interviews, experiments, or other activities requiring ethical oversight must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical requirements.

Where ethical approval is required, authors should provide the name of the approving body and relevant approval information in the manuscript. Where applicable, authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from research participants and that appropriate measures were taken to protect confidentiality and personal data. If formal ethical approval was not required, authors may be asked to explain the basis for that determination.

Data Availability and Research Transparency

Authors should report research methods and procedures with sufficient clarity to enable readers to understand how the study was conducted and how its conclusions were reached.

Where appropriate and legally and ethically possible, authors are encouraged to make research data, analytical materials, code, instruments, or other supporting materials available through appropriate repositories. Where relevant, manuscripts should include a Data Availability Statement explaining where supporting data can be accessed or why access is restricted.

Restrictions relating to confidentiality, personal-data protection, contractual obligations, security, or research ethics are recognised as legitimate reasons why data may not be publicly available.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their work, judgement, or editorial decisions. Authors must disclose all relevant sources of financial support and research funding.

Reviewers must decline a review where a significant conflict of interest could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality. Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest. In such cases, responsibility for the manuscript must be transferred to another qualified editor who is independent of the authors and the research.

Citation Ethics

Authors are responsible for ensuring that citations are accurate, relevant, and used for legitimate scholarly purposes. Citation manipulation, including excessive self-citation, coordinated citation practices, irrelevant citation requests, or attempts to artificially increase citation metrics, is not permitted. Editors and reviewers must not require authors to add citations solely for the purpose of increasing citations to themselves, the journal, or associated publications.

Authors are encouraged to engage with relevant literature within the journal's thematic areas, including, where scientifically appropriate, research previously published in Intellectual Economics. Citations to Intellectual Economics are not required and have no influence on editorial decisions or the outcome of peer review. Any citation to articles published in Intellectual Economics should be included solely on the basis of its scholarly relevance to the submitted manuscript.

Fit with the journal's scope is assessed on the basis of the manuscript's subject matter, scholarly contribution, theoretical positioning, methodology, and relevance, not on whether it cites the journal.

Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern

Intellectual Economics is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Where concerns relating to a published article are identified, the journal may issue:

  • a correction;
  • an expression of concern;
  • a retraction;
  • another appropriate editorial notice.

The form of corrective action depends on the nature, severity, and reliability of the available evidence. Corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, and related post-publication actions are handled in accordance with relevant COPE guidance and recognised international publication-ethics practice.

Post-publication notices are clearly linked to the affected article and transparently explain the reason for the editorial action while preserving the scholarly record.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that a significant error occurred in the evaluation of their manuscript or that relevant information was not adequately considered. Appeals must provide a clear and reasoned explanation and should address the scientific or procedural basis of the editorial decision.

Complaints concerning editorial procedures, peer-review conduct, publication ethics, research integrity, or the behaviour of individuals acting on behalf of the journal may be submitted in writing through the journal's official contact page. Complaints and appeals are considered objectively and, where appropriate, independently of the individual whose decision or conduct is being challenged.

Complaints concerning the Editor-in-Chief must not be handled solely by the Editor-in-Chief. Such complaints are referred to an appropriate independent representative of the publisher, Mykolas Romeris University.

The journal handles complaints and appeals in accordance with its editorial policies and relevant COPE guidance. Concerns relating to already published articles may also be submitted to the editorial office for post-publication assessment.

Generative AI Usage Policy

Intellectual Economics recognises that artificial intelligence and generative AI tools are increasingly used in research and scholarly communication. Their use must not compromise research integrity, transparency, confidentiality, originality, or author accountability.

Authorship

Generative AI tools, large language models, chatbots, and similar systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors. Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, citations, analysis, and conclusions of all submitted content.

AI-assisted language editing

AI-assisted tools may be used to improve the language, grammar, spelling, readability, or style of text originally produced by the authors. Such use must not alter the scientific meaning of the manuscript or replace the authors' responsibility for its content.

Generative AI in manuscript preparation

Authors must not use generative AI to fabricate or invent:

  • data;
  • empirical results;
  • references or citations;
  • sources;
  • quotations;
  • evidence;
  • findings.

Where generative AI has been used substantively in preparing manuscript content beyond routine language editing, authors should transparently disclose the nature and purpose of that use in an appropriate section of the manuscript. The authors remain responsible for verifying all AI-assisted content.

AI as part of the research methodology

The use of AI, machine learning, large language models, or generative AI as an object of study, research instrument, analytical method, or experimental component is permitted where scientifically justified. Such use must be described transparently and in sufficient methodological detail to enable readers to understand how the technology was used and how its outputs were evaluated. The use of AI as part of a legitimate and transparently reported research methodology must not be confused with undisclosed AI generation of scholarly content.

AI-generated images

AI-generated or AI-manipulated images must not be used in a way that misrepresents research data, evidence, or findings. Where artificial intelligence is itself part of the research method and generated visual material constitutes research data or an object of analysis, such use may be acceptable provided that it is clearly identified and methodologically justified.

Reviewers and editors

Manuscripts, reviewer reports, unpublished data, confidential correspondence, or other confidential editorial materials must not be uploaded to public or third-party generative AI systems where confidentiality, data protection, or intellectual-property safeguards cannot be assured. Reviewers and editors remain personally responsible for their assessments and editorial decisions and must not delegate those responsibilities to AI systems.