Publication Ethics Statement

Journal editors, peer reviewers and authors must all comply with a number of ethical standards concerning the publishing process. This statement outlines the publication ethics standards that the editors and member of the editorial board of GJTPR intend to follow as well as the standards the journal asks its authors and peer-reviewers to follow on an ongoing basis. These standards are based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines For Journal Editors by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Responsibilities of the General Journal Editors

The editors are to evaluate submissions for their quality and originality without regard to race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious or ethical beliefs, or nationality of the submitting authors.

The editors and editorial staff are not to disclose information about any submission to anyone other than the corresponding author, the (potential) reviewers or other editorial advisers.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Neither editors nor other journal staff are to reference unpublished content in a submission in their own research except with the explicit written consent of the author(s).

Publication Decisions
The editors of the journal are responsible for final decisions about the publication of submissions. The editors are guided by the policies set out in the Aims & Scope section, and constrained by any legal requirements as shall be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with reviewers in making this decision.

Confirmation Regarding Scientific Misconduct
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the journal editors will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, if necessary, the complete retraction of the work in question.

Data Sharing & Reproducibility
TPR adheres to the Budapest Open Access Initiative definition of open access, which means that it gives its users the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles. Users also have the right to crawl the texts for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. Creating derivative works is not covered by the BOAI, and is thus subject to permission from the Global Justice Network.

For details of the Budapest Open Access Initiative, including specific guidelines on data sharing, reproducibility and intellectual property, please visit the Initiative website here:

Responsibilities of Peer-Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review is an important cornerstone of each editorial decision by TPR. Standalone, special issue and symposium-based submissions are (non-anonymously) desk reviewed by the editor(s) of TPR or by the specific special edition / symposium editor, with papers passing this stage entering into double blind peer-review. Peer reviews are to be written with the intention to assist authors in improving their manuscripts (regardless of the reviewer's overall recommendation).

Please note that TPR additionally specializes in good quality, extended reviews and review articles which are (in most cases) only reviewed by the review editor(s), as opposed to undergoing the peer-review process applied to regular (stand-alone) contributions and special issue and symposium contributions.

Invited referees who don't feel qualified to review a given submission or who know that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors in order not to cause any unnecessary delays.

Any manuscripts received for review are to be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not show or discuss the content of any submission with others except if authorized by the editors.

Reviewers should adhere to objective standards of evaluation and refrain from personal criticism. Referees should articulate their views clearly and provide arguments for them, as appropriate.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers are asked to identify relevant published work that has not been cited in the submission under review. If reviewers state that an argument had been previously reported, then they should provide the relevant citation. Referees should also report any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work of which they are aware.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and may not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating submissions in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or other agents or institutions connected to the manuscript under review.

Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting Research
Authors should present an accurate account of their research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. A paper should contain sufficient argumentative detail and references. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are not acceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should demonstrate that they have written original works. If they have used the work and/or words of others, then this must be appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one article or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite other works that have been influential for their own work.

Authorship of a Manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those (and only those) who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the undertaken research should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
 The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in their submission. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works
Authors should immediately notify the journal's editors in case he/she discovers any significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work. In such cases, authors must cooperate with the journal to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.