Research Ethics & Misconduct Policy

This policy sets out the standards of research and publication ethics that Opus Publica expects of authors, reviewers, and editors across all of our journals, and the process we follow when concerns are raised. It is aligned with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work. All listed authors must agree to be listed and must have approved the final submitted version. Anyone who contributed to the work but does not meet authorship criteria should be named in an acknowledgements section instead. Changes to authorship after submission (adding, removing, or reordering authors) must be approved in writing by all original authors and by the handling editor.

Submitted work must be original and must not be substantially reproduced from the author's own prior publications (self-plagiarism) or from the work of others without full, clear attribution. Direct quotation must be clearly marked and cited. Authors are responsible for securing any necessary permissions for material reproduced from other copyrighted sources.

Manuscripts submitted to an Opus Publica journal must not be under simultaneous consideration elsewhere, and must not have been previously published in substantially the same form. Authors who wish to build on their own previously published work must disclose this at submission and clearly differentiate the new contribution.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the data, sources, and evidence presented in their work. Fabrication (reporting data or results that were not actually obtained) and falsification (manipulating data or results to misrepresent findings) are serious violations of research integrity and will result in rejection or, if discovered post-publication, retraction.

Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial, institutional, personal, or political relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work or its evaluation. This includes funding sources, consulting relationships, and affiliations with organizations that have a direct interest in the subject matter, which is of particular relevance to policy-focused research and advocacy-adjacent scholarship. Undisclosed material conflicts of interest, once identified, may result in a correction, an added disclosure statement, or in serious cases a retraction.

Where a submission involves research with human participants (for example, surveys, interviews, or fieldwork), authors must confirm that appropriate informed consent was obtained and that the research complied with applicable ethical review requirements in the jurisdiction where it was conducted. Authors working with sensitive political, security, or personally identifiable data are expected to take reasonable steps to protect the safety and privacy of research subjects, particularly where publication could expose individuals to risk.

Reviewers are expected to evaluate submissions objectively, disclose any conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment, maintain the confidentiality of unpublished work, and decline to use information obtained through review for personal advantage. Editors are expected to make publication decisions based on the intellectual merit of the work, independent of the authors' race, gender, nationality, religion, political belief, or institutional affiliation.

Concerns about a submitted or published work — including suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship disputes, or other misconduct — may be raised by readers, reviewers, editors, or authors themselves at any time, including after publication.

When a concern is raised:

1. The relevant journal's Editor-in-Chief reviews the concern and determines whether it warrants investigation
2. Where appropriate, the author(s) are given the opportunity to respond
3. The editorial board may consult COPE's guidance and flowcharts for the relevant type of concern
4. Depending on the outcome, the result may be no action, a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction, in line with our Corrections, Retractions & Updates Policy
5. In cases involving suspected serious misconduct, we may also contact the author's institution, in line with COPE guidance

We aim to handle all concerns fairly, confidentially where appropriate, and without retaliation against those who raise them in good faith.

To raise a research integrity concern about an Opus Publica publication, please contact the relevant journal's editorial team, or write to us directly at editorial@opuspublica.com.

This policy works alongside our Corrections, Retractions & Updates Policy, our Peer Review Policy (published per journal), and our Author Agreement & Copyright/Licensing Policy.