Authors

Authors submitting manuscripts to JEP are expected to comply with the following ethical principles:

1. Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts are original and have not been plagiarized.
2. Authors must not reproduce or republish work that has previously been published in another journal.
3. Authors must not submit manuscripts that are currently under review or consideration by another journal.
4. Authors may submit their manuscripts to another journal only after receiving formal notification of rejection or after their withdrawal request has been officially approved.
5. Authors must promptly inform the Editor-in-Chief or publisher of any inaccuracies or errors in their submitted or published work so that appropriate corrections or retractions can be made.
6. Authors must make significant scholarly contributions to their work and take responsibility for the content, revisions, and integrity of their manuscripts.

Editors

Editors of JEP are expected to uphold the following responsibilities:

1. Editors are responsible for the selection of content published in the journal and for continuously improving the quality of its publications.
2. Editors must provide clear author guidelines and manuscript templates to assist authors in preparing and submitting their manuscripts.
3. Editors must critically assess manuscripts to ensure that they comply with publication ethics and are evaluated honestly, objectively, and independently. Manuscripts must be assessed according to their scholarly quality, regardless of the authors' nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation. Editors must avoid bias in all editorial decisions, including the selection of reviewers.
4. Editors must ensure that the peer review process is thorough, transparent, objective, and fair.
5. Editors must ensure that all published manuscripts have undergone peer review by qualified reviewers.
6. Editors must select reviewers whose expertise is appropriate to the subject matter of the manuscript. Reviewers must be capable of evaluating the manuscript and must not have conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality.
7. Editors may reject manuscripts without external peer review if they fall outside the journal's scope or are of insufficient academic quality. Such decisions must not be based on the authors' personal backgrounds or institutional affiliations.
8. Editors must endeavor to ensure that published research complies with the principles of publication ethics established by COPE and other relevant international guidelines.
9. Editors must provide forms for authors to complete and sign, including ethical declarations and copyright agreements, as applicable.

Reviewers

Reviewers of JEP are expected to adhere to the following ethical principles:

1. Reviewers must act honestly, objectively, impartially, and independently, and their assessments must be guided by scientific integrity.
2. Reviewers must critically evaluate manuscripts within their areas of expertise, remain open to new ideas, maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts under review, refrain from personal gain from the work they assess, and seek to improve the quality of the manuscripts they review.
3. Reviewers are responsible for assisting editors in determining whether manuscripts are suitable for publication and for helping authors improve the quality of their work.
4. Reviewers must consistently uphold fundamental scientific principles and rigorous analytical standards throughout the review process.
5. Review reports must be honest, objective, and supported by clear academic arguments. Possible recommendations include:
   1. Acceptance without revision or acceptance with minor revisions, in which the revised manuscript does not need to be returned to the reviewer.
   2. Acceptance subject to revision, in which the revised manuscript must be returned to the reviewer for further evaluation.
   3. Rejection with a recommendation that the manuscript be submitted to another, more appropriate publication.
   4. Rejection with a recommendation against publication because the work is scientifically flawed or may have harmful consequences for users or the public.
6. Reviewers must not use manuscripts under review for personal or third-party benefit. Any use of material from a manuscript under review requires the author's permission. Manuscripts under review must not be distributed or disclosed to unauthorized parties.