This statement follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The short version: we verify rather than assume, every integrity decision is made by a named human, and detection is never the end of the process — a defined procedure follows.
Authorship
- All persons who qualify as authors are named, and all named authors qualify — no gift, guest or ghost authorship. Every listed author has approved the submission.
- AI tools are not authors. AI may assist or draft, but a named human author approves every part of the work and is accountable for it — accountability cannot be delegated to software. Author-side AI use must be disclosed (see the AI-use policy).
- Authorship disputes are handled following COPE guidance; changes to the author list after submission require the agreement of all authors and an explanation to the editor.
Originality and prior publication
Submissions must be original, must not be under consideration elsewhere, and must credit prior work properly — including the authors' own. Preprints are welcome and do not count as prior publication.
Competing interests, funding and ethics approvals
All authors declare competing interests and funding sources at submission — the submission form requires an explicit statement (a declared "none" counts; silence does not). Research involving humans, animals or personal data requires the appropriate approval or a documented explanation of why none applies, declared at submission.
What we screen for
Every submission is screened as part of review: references are verified for existence and for whether they support the claims they are cited for, and files are scanned for hidden instructions aimed at manipulating the review system; dedicated text-overlap and image-duplication screening will be in place before the journal's DOAJ application. A misconduct-grade finding raises a hold for a named human editor — never a silent automated rejection.
How suspected misconduct is handled
When fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation or an attempt to manipulate the review process is suspected — before or after publication — we follow a COPE-based procedure: the authors are asked for an explanation first; if the response is inadequate, the authors' institution may be notified; and for published work the corrections and retractions machinery applies. Outcomes are proportionate to the finding, and authors are heard before conclusions are reached.
Editor and journal integrity
- The founding editors do not publish their own research in this journal.
- Editorial decisions are made without regard to payment or ability to pay — see the fees & waivers policy.
- Every decision is signed by a named editor and rests on an auditable assessment record (see the peer-review policy).
- Dual-use and ethics-of-the-research concerns (for example, a method whose primary use is re-identifying people) route to named-human review and can be grounds for rejection.
Raising a concern
Anyone — reader, author, reviewer or third party — can raise an integrity concern about a submission or a published article by writing to contact@fairpressjournals.com. Concerns are acknowledged, investigated by someone independent of the original decision where one exists, and answered. Complaints about the journal's own conduct follow the complaints & appeals procedure.