Publication Ethics

SOBER Proceedings is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics, research integrity, academic transparency, and responsible scholarly communication.

Authors, reviewers, Proceedings Editors, and other individuals involved in the evaluation and publication process are expected to act in accordance with recognized principles of academic integrity and responsible scholarly publishing.

1. Originality, Plagiarism, and Redundant Publication

Papers submitted for consideration must represent original scholarly research and must appropriately acknowledge all sources, ideas, data, and materials used.

Plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, inappropriate manipulation of data or results, and other forms of research misconduct are not permitted.

Submitted papers may be subject to similarity screening as part of the editorial evaluation process.

Papers must not contain substantial content that has already been published elsewhere or be simultaneously under consideration for publication in another proceedings volume, journal, book, or other scholarly publication.

2. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the paper.

All listed authors must approve the submitted and final versions of the paper and accept responsibility for the integrity of their contributions.

Individuals who have contributed to the research but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.

Any changes to authorship after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors and the relevant editorial authority.

3. Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, and Proceedings Editors must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research, evaluation, or publication process.

Reviewers and editors should not participate in the evaluation of a paper where a conflict of interest could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, the independence and impartiality of the process.

Where a relevant conflict exists, appropriate measures are taken to ensure independent editorial and peer-review evaluation.

4. Research Ethics and Informed Consent

Research involving human participants, personal data, animals, or other activities requiring ethical oversight must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical requirements.

Where ethical approval is required, authors must obtain the necessary approval before conducting the research and provide relevant information concerning the approving body, approval date, and approval or reference number where applicable.

Informed consent must be obtained where required, particularly when research involves identifiable participants, personal information, interviews, surveys, experiments, or other forms of participant-based research.

Authors are responsible for protecting participant privacy, confidentiality, and personal data.

5. Research and Data Integrity

Authors are responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the data, analyses, figures, tables, and other research materials presented in their papers.

Fabrication, falsification, selective manipulation, or misleading presentation of research data or findings is not permitted.

Authors should retain the underlying research data and documentation for an appropriate period following publication and should be prepared to provide supporting information where reasonably required for the investigation of concerns regarding research integrity.

6. Use of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the content of a scholarly paper.

Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, citations, and overall content of their papers regardless of whether artificial intelligence tools have been used during the research or writing process.

Where artificial intelligence tools have been used substantively in the preparation, analysis, or development of a paper, such use should be transparently disclosed where relevant.

Artificial intelligence must not be used to fabricate data, references, results, or other scholarly content.

7. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to evaluate papers objectively, constructively, and within their areas of academic expertise.

Information obtained through the peer-review process must be treated as confidential and must not be used for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers should identify relevant conflicts of interest and decline an assignment where their independence or impartiality may be affected.

Reviewer comments should address the scholarly quality of the paper and should not contain inappropriate personal criticism of the authors.

8. Editorial Responsibility and Independence

Editorial and publication decisions are based on the academic quality, originality, methodological soundness, relevance, ethical compliance, and scholarly contribution of the paper.

Proceedings Editors are expected to conduct the editorial process impartially and to avoid decisions influenced by personal, institutional, financial, commercial, or other inappropriate considerations.

Where a Proceedings Editor has a conflict of interest concerning a particular paper, responsibility for the relevant evaluation or decision should be assigned to another appropriate member of the editorial structure.

Information relating to submitted papers and the peer-review process is treated confidentially.

9. Research Misconduct and Ethical Concerns

Allegations or indications of plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, unethical research, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, manipulation of the peer-review process, or other forms of research or publication misconduct are taken seriously.

Where a credible concern is raised, the matter may be investigated by the Proceedings Editors in consultation with the relevant conference or institutional authorities where appropriate.

Authors, reviewers, and other individuals involved in the matter may be requested to provide relevant information or documentation.

Necessary editorial action may be taken according to the nature and seriousness of the issue.

10. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Issues

SOBER Proceedings recognizes its responsibility to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record after publication.

Where a significant error is identified in a published paper, an appropriate correction may be issued.

Where serious ethical violations, unreliable findings, plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other major problems substantially affect the integrity or reliability of a published paper, retraction or another appropriate editorial notice may be considered.

Post-publication concerns are evaluated on the basis of the available evidence and the nature of the issue.

11. Complaints and Appeals

Authors and other interested parties may submit reasoned complaints or appeals concerning the editorial or publication process to the SOBER Proceedings Editorial Office.

Complaints and appeals are evaluated objectively by the appropriate editorial authority. Where necessary, individuals who were not directly involved in the original decision may participate in the evaluation to preserve impartiality.

An appeal does not automatically result in reversal of an editorial decision.

12. Funding Disclosure

Authors should disclose financial support, grants, sponsorship, or other funding received for the research where applicable.

Where no external funding was received, authors may state this explicitly when required by the relevant proceedings volume.