Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Introduction

At Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies, our commitment to the integrity of our academic content and publishing process is guaranteed. We encourage researchers to conduct their work in line with established best practices and the professional codes of conduct of internationally regulated bodies.

Research Integrity

We uphold the highest standards of research integrity. We expect all contributors to our journal to abide by the following core principles:

Maintaining complete honesty in all aspects of research.
Ensuring thoroughness, accuracy, and excellence in research practice.
Communicating research reports with heightened transparency and integrity.
Protecting the rights, care, and well-being of all human and animal subjects in the study.

Editorial Process

We are committed to a high standard in our editorial process, ensuring all content is developed with rigour and independence. Our inclusive editorial policies are as follows:

Initial Submission Check: After submission, manuscripts undergo a preliminary check and will only proceed to peer review if they meet the following criteria:

The manuscript falls within the journal's scope.
Authorship information is complete and well-grounded.
The manuscript meets our standards for presentation and formatting.
Required information regarding research ethics and consent is included.
The manuscript is free from plagiarism, with a maximum acceptable similarity level of 20%.

Peer Review and Decision: When a submission passes the preliminary check, qualified and independent reviewers are invited to critically assess it. Following a thorough evaluation of the reviewers' comments, editors will decide to either accept, reject, or request a revision from the author(s).
Final Decision: After a revised manuscript is resubmitted, it may be sent for a second round of review. The editors will then make a final decision to accept or reject the revised manuscript. If accepted, the manuscript will undergo professional layout editing, author proofreading, and format conversion before publication.

Peer Review

We use a double-blind peer review process to ensure impartial assessment of submitted manuscripts. Our reviewers are external to the journal and publisher. We acknowledge the indispensable role of critical assessment in the integrity of the scholarly record and adhere to the following principles:

Reviewers should only accept manuscripts for which they have the subject expertise required for a proper, prompt review.
Reviewers must ensure the confidentiality of the peer review process, refraining from disclosing any details of a manuscript or its review.
Reviewers must not use information from a manuscript to their own advantage or to the disadvantage of others.
Reviewers should declare all potential conflicts of interest.
Reviews should be impartial, objective, and constructive, free from personal or defamatory comments.
Reviewers must not let their judgment be influenced by the manuscript's origin, nationality, religion, political beliefs, gender, or other characteristics of the authors.
Reviewers should recognise peer review as a reciprocal effort and strive to complete their reviews in a timely manner.
Impersonating another individual during the review process is considered a serious breach of ethics.

Handling Submissions from Editorial Board Members

To ensure impartiality and avoid conflicts of interest, all manuscripts submitted by our Editor-in-Chief, editors, or any member of our Editorial Board are subject to the following strict process:

The submission is treated like any other, but the submitting editor/board member is completely excluded from the peer-review and decision-making process for that manuscript.
The manuscript will be assigned to an independent editor or another senior editorial board member who will manage the entire peer-review process, ensuring it adheres to the double-blind procedure.
The final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be made by the independent editor or by the Editor-in-Chief (if the submitting author is not the EiC), based solely on the independent reviews.

Special Issue Policies

The journal applies the following policies for its special issues:

The Editor-in-Chief may serve as the editor, or an external Guest Editor or Editors with proven expertise and publication records on the special issue theme will be appointed.
The Guest Editor will screen submissions, invite reviewers, coordinate the review process, and make recommendations. However, when the Guest Editor(s) share an institutional affiliation with an author, the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript will be made by the Editor-in-Chief or another assigned editorial board member.
The review process for special issues follows the same double-blind, rigorous procedure as regular issues.
While a special issue with authors from a single institution is possible, the peer review must follow our standard procedure, and the theme must fall within the journal's scope.

Authorship

Scholarly contributions to the development of research work have significant academic implications. Authorship comes with both liability and accountability. Therefore, potential authors must be aware of the following:

Individuals with considerable contributions to the work's conception, design, data acquisition/analysis, and drafting or revision must be listed as authors.
The corresponding author assumes primary responsibility for communication with the journal and does not have a superior role.
Individuals whose contributions do not justify authorship (e.g., data collectors, professional writing assistants) should be acknowledged in a separate section.

Authorship Change

Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies recognises that circumstances may arise where a change in authorship is necessary after a manuscript has been submitted. Such changes, whether adding or removing an author, must be handled with transparency and require approval from the journal's editors.

Policy for Authorship Change

During Peer Review: Any request for adding, deleting, or re-ordering authors must be made by the corresponding author and requires a written explanation for the change. This request must be accompanied by a signed statement from all authors involved (including those being added or removed) confirming their agreement with the change.
After Acceptance or Publication: Authorship changes after a manuscript has been accepted for publication are highly unusual and will be considered only in extraordinary circumstances. Such requests must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief. If a change is approved after publication, a formal Correction Notice will be published, linked to the original article, to document the change for the public record.
Justification: All authorship change requests must include a clear and valid justification for the change, such as the discovery of a significant, previously unmentioned contribution or an error in the original author list. Changes are not permitted for reasons unrelated to scholarly contributions (e.g., a disagreement between authors, a change in employment, or an attempt to bypass a conflict of interest).
Editor's Discretion: The journal's editors reserve the right to decline any request for authorship change that does not meet the above criteria or is deemed to be ethically questionable.

Plagiarism

We utilise Turnitin to screen all submitted manuscripts. The use of another author's language, ideas, and expressions as one's own is strictly unacceptable. Our maximum range of acceptability for a manuscript's originality is 20% similarity or below. Self-plagiarism, defined as using a considerable part of one's previously published work without proper citation or re-publishing the same content, is also considered an offence. To avoid this, authors must correctly cite all sources, including their own previous work.

Generative AI Policies

For Authors:

AI is not permitted to generate manuscripts; it should only be used to improve readability and language under strict human oversight.
Authors are fully responsible and accountable for the final content.
AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

For Figures, Images, and Artwork:

The use of AI to create or alter images, figures, or artwork is generally not permitted.
The only exception is if AI is an integral part of the research design (e.g., AI-assisted imaging), and such use must be described in a reproducible manner in the methods section.

For Reviewers and Editors:

Submitted manuscripts are confidential documents. Reviewers and editors are strictly prohibited from uploading any part of a manuscript or their review reports into a generative AI tool to protect the authors' confidentiality and the integrity of the peer-review process.
The critical thinking and original assessment required for peer review and editorial decisions can only be performed by humans.

Sex/Gender Inclusiveness Language

Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies is committed to promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in academic publishing. To ensure our content and practices are inclusive, we require authors, reviewers, and editors to use gender-neutral language in all submitted manuscripts, communications, and peer reviews. This includes using terms that are not specific to a particular sex or gender identity. For instance, using "researcher" instead of "he," and "they" instead of "he/she."

Handling Appeals and Complaints

Mdooter is dedicated to ensuring a fair and transparent publishing process. Authors who believe they have received an unfair decision on their manuscript have the right to appeal.

Appeals Process:

Authors must submit an appeal in writing to the journal's official email address within two weeks of receiving the rejection decision.
The appeal must provide a detailed, evidence-based justification for why the decision should be reconsidered.
The Editor-in-Chief will review the appeal and may choose to consult with an independent member of the Editorial Board, especially if the original decision was made by a different editor.
The decision on the appeal is final.

Complaints:

Complaints regarding any aspect of the journal's processes (e.g., reviewer misconduct, editorial delays, ethical concerns) should be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief.
All complaints will be handled with confidentiality and professionalism, with a thorough investigation to ensure a fair resolution.

Average Weeks from Submission to Publication: 8 weeks.

Research with Animals or Humans

All research involving animals or human subjects must have prior approval from a research ethics committee (IRB). Authors must confirm that they obtained informed consent from all participants, which is a process to ensure subjects fully understand their roles, the research objectives, and any potential risks.

Research Involving Vulnerable Groups

For studies involving vulnerable groups, such as children (under 18), authors must:

Obtain and provide evidence of signed consent from parents or legal guardians.
Ensure that both the vulnerable group members and their guardians fully understand the implications of participation and consent to the study's publication.

Conflicts of Interest (COI) and Funding

To ensure unbiased publications, authors are required to declare:

All financial COIs, with no time limits.
All relevant non-financial potential COIs.

Libel, Defamation, and Freedom of Expression

We discourage false publications or statements that threaten the reputation of individuals or organisations. Any such issues will be handled by our legal team.

Retractions, Corrections, and Expressions of Concern

The Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies is committed to upholding the integrity of the scholarly record. We follow established industry guidelines (such as those from COPE) for handling post-publication issues, which may be initiated by the author(s), editor(s), or the author’s institution.

1. Retractions

A Retraction is reserved for articles that contain major errors or ethical breaches that invalidate the results or conclusions.

Grounds for Retraction: Major misconduct (e.g., data fabrication or falsification), extensive plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research practices, or profound errors that invalidate the scientific findings.
Procedure:
- The published article will remain visible, but a Retraction Notice will be published, electronically linked to the original article and clearly stating the reason(s) for the retraction and who initiated it.
- The original article will be clearly watermarked as "Retracted" on every page.
- The Notice will include an apology or expressions of gratitude where appropriate.

2. Corrections (Errata and Corrigenda)

A Correction is used to fix minor errors that do not affect the study's validity, results, or conclusions.

Errata (Publisher Errors): Used to correct minor errors introduced during the production process (e.g., misspellings, typographical errors, or formatting mistakes).
Corrigenda (Author Errors): Used to correct minor errors made by the author(s) (e.g., misreporting of a specific value or misspelling an author's name).
Procedure: A separate, citable Correction Notice will be published in the next available issue, providing the full original citation and a detailed, concise explanation of the error and the corrected text.

3. Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern is a temporary public notice issued when editors have compelling evidence of potential scientific or ethical misconduct, but the investigation is incomplete or has not yet reached a final conclusion (e.g., an institutional investigation is ongoing).

Procedure: A separate notice is published, linked to the original article, informing readers that serious concerns have been raised about the integrity of the publication.
Resolution: Once the investigation is complete, the Expression of Concern will be followed by a final decision, which will result in either a Retraction, a Correction, or a dismissal of the concern with an accompanying statement.

Falsification, Fabrication, and Image Manipulation

The Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies maintains a zero-tolerance policy against all forms of research misconduct. Authors are required to present their research results and data with complete honesty and transparency.

1. Definitions of Misconduct

Fabrication: Making up data, results, or figures and recording or reporting them.
Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Misrepresentation (Image Manipulation): The inappropriate manipulation of images, figures, or graphical data to misrepresent the findings.

2. Policy on Image Manipulation

We recognise that minor adjustments to images (such as brightness, contrast, or colour balance) may be necessary for clarity. However, authors must adhere to the following strict guidelines:

No Obscuring or Eliminating Information: Adjustments must not obscure, eliminate, or introduce any information present in the original data or image.
No Selective Enhancement: Selective enhancement, obscuring, or deletion of specific features within an image is strictly forbidden.
Transparency: When image manipulation is performed (even minor adjustments), it must be applied uniformly to the entire image and must be clearly disclosed in the figure legend and/or the methodology section.
Original Data: The Editorial Office reserves the right to request the original, un-modified data and/or high-resolution images for comparison purposes at any stage of the review or post-publication process.

3. Consequences

Any submission suspected of fabrication, falsification, or egregious image manipulation will be subject to a formal investigation in collaboration with the authors' institution(s). If misconduct is confirmed, the journal will take severe action, including immediate rejection of the manuscript, publication of a formal retraction notice (if already published), and permanent banning of the author(s) from future submissions.

Fraudulent Research and Research Misconduct

The Mdooter Journal of Communication and Digital Technologies is fundamentally committed to ethical publishing and maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward fraudulent research and research misconduct.

Scope and Action

Upon discovering or receiving credible allegations of research misconduct (including but not limited to fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or misuse of human/animal subjects data), the journal will take the following steps:

Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief and relevant editorial board members will conduct an initial assessment to determine the validity of the allegations.
Investigation: If the allegation is deemed credible, the journal will formally collaborate with the author's institution(s) and other relevant institutional or governmental bodies to facilitate a thorough and independent investigation.
Transparency: If the investigation is ongoing and the published work's reliability is uncertain, the journal will immediately issue an Expression of Concern to warn readers.

Consequences and Sanctions

The final action taken by the journal is based on the severity of the misconduct confirmed by the investigation:

Retraction: Any publication found to contain confirmed fraudulent data, fabricated results, or profound unethical practice will be retracted immediately.
Correction: If the misconduct involves a minor error that does not invalidate the entire study, a formal Correction Notice will be published.
Sanctions: Authors confirmed to have engaged in misconduct will be subject to a publication ban from the journal, and the case may be reported to funding agencies or relevant professional organisations. The journal also reserves the right to notify the institutions of any co-authors who were aware of or complicit in the fraudulent research.

Data and Supporting Evidence

Authors are encouraged to be transparent about data coding and materials. They are expected to provide and store accurate data and supporting evidence in a public repository to allow for verification, understanding, and replication of findings.

Copyright and License

Copyright on articles published by Mdooter is retained by the author(s).
By submitting a manuscript, authors grant Mdooter a license to publish the article and identify Verlumun and Penda Publishers as the original publisher.
Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely, provided its integrity is maintained, and its original authors, citation details, and publisher are identified.
For authors who cannot hold copyright, minor adjustments to the agreement can be made upon request after acceptance.

License Agreement

By submitting an article to Mdooter, I certify that:

My co-authors authorise me to enter into these arrangements.
On behalf of myself and my co-authors, I warrant that:

The article is original, has not been previously published in a peer-reviewed journal, is not under consideration elsewhere, and does not infringe on any existing copyright or third-party rights.
I/we are the sole author(s) and have the full authority to enter this agreement.
The article contains nothing unlawful or libellous.
I/we have taken due care to ensure the article's integrity, and to the best of my/our knowledge, all statements are factual, and any formulas will not cause harm if followed.

All co-authors and I agree that if the article is accepted, it will be licensed in accordance with Mdooter's policies.

IMPORTANT: The license agreement applies to all published articles, regardless of whether a form is filled out.

Licensing

All articles published by Mdooter are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA). This license allows readers to freely read, download, copy, distribute, print, or link to the full texts for any lawful, noncommercial purpose, provided they give proper attribution.

Archiving Policy

Mdooter's archiving policy is as follows:

Self-Archiving: Authors are allowed to archive their own articles on personal or corporate websites and institutional repositories after publication.
Public Archives: Authors may self-archive their articles in public and/or commercial subject-based archives.
Embargo: There is no embargo period. However, the final published source should always be cited and a link provided to the article's URL on the journal's website.
Journal Archiving: All articles are digitally archived on the journal's website and on the PKP Preservation Network (PN), LOCKSS, and CLOCKSS platforms to ensure long-term preservation.

Repository Policy

Authors are allowed to deposit their works in institutional or subject-specific repositories based on the version of the manuscript:

Submitted Version: Should not be deposited in an online repository to avoid plagiarism flags during the peer-review process.
Accepted Version (Author Accepted Manuscript): Can be deposited in an institutional or any repository of the author’s choice.
Published Version (Version of Record): Can be deposited in institutional repositories, authors' websites, and public or noncommercial subject-based repositories.