Ecosocial Studies: Banking, Finance and Cybersecurity Journal (E-ISSN: 3081-0671) and its editorial team are firmly committed to ensuring the integrity of the academic publishing process. All stakeholders involved in the publication—including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher—are expected to strictly adhere to ethical guidelines in accordance with the best practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
(See: COPE Core Practices)

---

1. Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board

Editorial Decisions
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts are suitable for publication. This decision is based on scholarly merit, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and compliance with ethical standards. Cases of plagiarism, defamation, and academic misconduct are handled rigorously, and expert reviewers may be consulted during the decision-making process.

Fair Evaluation
Manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit, without discrimination based on authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnicity, nationality, or political affiliation.

Confidentiality
All editorial staff, including the Editor-in-Chief and members of the editorial board, must maintain confidentiality regarding submitted manuscripts. Information about submissions may only be shared with the corresponding author, reviewers, or editorial advisors.

Conflicts of Interest
Editors must not use unpublished materials disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the author’s written consent. In cases of professional or personal conflicts of interest, the editor must recuse themselves from the decision-making process and delegate the responsibility to another qualified editor.

---

2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers assist the editorial board in making publication decisions and provide constructive feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts.

Declining a Review
If a reviewer feels unqualified to evaluate a manuscript or cannot complete the review within the required timeframe, they must notify the editor promptly.

Confidentiality
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shared with others or discussed without explicit permission from the editor.

Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively, avoiding personal criticism of the author. Reviewers should support their evaluations with clear and logical arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant, previously published work not cited by the authors. Suspicions of plagiarism, redundancy, or research misconduct must be reported to the editor.

Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest and refrain from reviewing manuscripts where such conflicts exist due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships. Unpublished material contained in reviewed manuscripts must not be used for the reviewer’s own research without the author’s written consent.

---

3. Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Standards
Authors must present their research accurately and objectively. Data should be represented truthfully, with sufficient detail and references to allow replication. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention
Authors should be prepared to provide raw data for editorial review and retain such data for a reasonable period following publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
Manuscripts must be original. Authors must properly cite and reference the work and ideas of others. All forms of plagiarism are unacceptable.
(See: COPE Guidelines on Plagiarism)

Multiple or Redundant Submission
Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Republishing previously published work without proper citation or justification is unethical.

Acknowledgment of Sources
All sources used must be appropriately acknowledged. Information obtained through private communication (e.g., peer review reports, grant applications) cannot be used without explicit written permission.

Authorship Criteria
Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All co-authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. Contributors not meeting authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their consent.
(See: COPE Guidelines on Authorship)

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose all financial or other conflicts of interest that could affect the interpretation of the results, including institutional affiliations, funding, consultancies, stock ownership, or patent licenses.

Correction of Errors
If an author discovers a significant error in their published work, they must notify the editorial office promptly and cooperate with editors to retract or correct the article.

---

4. Responsibilities of the Publisher

The publisher of Ecosocial Studies: Banking, Finance and Cybersecurity Journal (IMCRA – International Meetings and Conferences Research Association) ensures that best practices in publication ethics are maintained at all stages of the editorial process. The publisher works with editors, reviewers, and authors to:

• Detect and prevent publication misconduct;

• Promote transparency and ethical behavior;

• Uphold international academic standards.

In confirmed cases of misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data falsification, unethical research), the publisher will take appropriate action in line with COPE recommendations (see: COPE Flowcharts), which may include issuing retractions, corrections, or expressions of concern.

---

5. Handling of Misconduct

Investigation
Allegations of research or publication misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication) will be investigated in accordance with COPE procedures.

Corrective Measures
If misconduct is confirmed, corrective measures such as retraction, correction, or editorial notes will be issued. Relevant institutions, funders, or regulatory bodies may also be notified when appropriate.

---

6. Additional Editorial Ethics

Editorial Oversight
Editors are responsible for:

• Safeguarding the academic quality and integrity of published content;

• Protecting authors’ intellectual freedom within academic standards;

• Preventing violations of scientific and ethical norms;

• Issuing corrections, retractions, or apologies when necessary;

• Ensuring timely and fair editorial processing of manuscripts.

Author Rights and Responsibilities

• Manuscripts must be original, unpublished, and not under review elsewhere.

• All sources must be cited properly.

• All listed authors must have contributed substantially to the work.

• Individuals without significant academic contribution should not be listed as authors.

---

7. Research Involving Humans, Animals, and Sensitive Data

Human Participants
All research involving humans must comply with internationally recognized ethical principles, including the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (link). Authors must state that approval was obtained from an appropriate Institutional Review Board (IRB) or Ethics Committee.

Vulnerable Populations
Studies involving children, elderly individuals, patients, or socially/economically disadvantaged groups require special safeguards. Authors must demonstrate informed consent, justify the necessity of involving such groups, and ensure that no harm results from participation.

Informed Consent and Data Protection
Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants (or guardians where applicable). Personal data must be handled in compliance with data protection regulations, including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

Animal Research
All research involving animals must comply with institutional, national, and international guidelines for the ethical treatment of animals. Authors must state th