The Editorial Board and reviewers follow the ethical principles and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) throughout the editorial and publication process. Authors are encouraged to consult the COPE guidelines (www.publicationethics.org) and to comply with internationally recognized standards of research integrity and responsible publishing.

Editors are responsible for safeguarding the quality and integrity of the scholarly record. Any suspected cases of research or publication misconduct are carefully evaluated in collaboration with the publisher, and appropriate measures are taken when necessary.

All submitted manuscripts are screened for originality using CrossCheck and the publisher’s plagiarism detection software, system antiplagiat.ro, before and during the peer-review process. The editorial team ensures confidentiality throughout manuscript evaluation and maintains professional communication with authors.

The journal applies a double-blind peer-review process to protect the anonymity of authors and reviewers. Editors may request revisions or make minor editorial corrections. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards, fall outside its scope, or violate ethical or legal requirements, including plagiarism or copyright infringement, may be rejected without external review.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review is essential for supporting editors in making informed decisions and improving manuscript quality. Reviewers should provide constructive, objective, and timely feedback. If a reviewer feels unqualified or unable to complete the review within the required timeframe, they should notify the editor and decline the assignment.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the manuscript content for personal advantage or contact authors directly without editor permission. Any unpublished data or ideas should not be incorporated into the reviewer’s own work without written consent from the authors.

Objectivity and Fairness

Reviews must be impartial and free from personal bias. Criticism should focus on the content, be clearly expressed, and supported by evidence. Personal remarks about the authors are unacceptable. Reviewers should also identify any relevant prior work and alert the editor to substantial overlap or similarity with existing publications.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including competitive, collaborative, or institutional relationships with the authors. In such cases, reviewers should consult the editor before accepting the review. Suggestions to cite the reviewer’s own work should only be made for valid scientific reasons.

By following these guidelines, reviewers help ensure a fair, ethical, and high-quality peer-review process.

Reporting Standards

Authors must provide an accurate, objective, and transparent account of their research, including sufficient detail and references to allow replication. Fabrication, falsification, or knowingly misleading statements are strictly unethical. Review articles and editorials should also be factual and objective, with opinions clearly identified.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide supporting data during review or to comply with the journal’s open data policies. Where possible, data should be made publicly accessible and retained for a reasonable period after publication.

Originality and Acknowledgment

Manuscripts must be original. All sources, ideas, and previously published work must be properly cited, and permission obtained when required. Plagiarism and unauthorized use of unpublished or private material are unacceptable.

Multiple and Redundant Publication

Authors must not submit the same work to multiple journals simultaneously or publish substantially overlapping content without disclosure. Prior dissemination as an abstract, thesis, lecture, or preprint should be acknowledged.

Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should reflect significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All co-authors must approve the final manuscript and its submission. The corresponding author is responsible for confirming the authorship list and communicating changes to the editor, which are allowed only in exceptional circumstances with all authors’ consent.

Conflicts of Interest and Funding

Authors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and acknowledge all sources of funding.

Responsibilities

Authors are collectively accountable for the integrity and accuracy of their work. Errors must be promptly reported to the editor, and all authors should participate in peer review and respond to editorial or reviewer requests in a timely and professional manner. Minor editorial corrections, including title, style, or phrasing, should be accepted by the authors.

The use of AI-generated or AI-assisted image manipulation is not allowed in submitted manuscripts. Generative AI or AI-assisted tools must not be used to create content, figures, or images, except when the manuscript focuses on AI as a research topic. In such cases, the use of AI should be clearly disclosed, and methods and outputs appropriately cited.

Authors conducting research involving human participants must ensure that all procedures comply with relevant laws, institutional guidelines, and have received approval from the appropriate ethics committee(s). Manuscripts should include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained and that participants’ privacy and confidentiality are protected. Research must adhere to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Any case details, personal information, or images of individuals require appropriate consent and permissions.

The Publishing Board of Applied Research in Administrative Sciences adheres to the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. The journal ensures authors retain the freedom to publish their work, respects the privacy of all parties involved, and safeguards authors’ copyright while promoting appropriate licensing for wide dissemination.