International Research Journal of Science, Technology, Education, and Management (IRJSTEM) is committed to responsible scholarly publishing, research integrity, editorial independence, and transparent ethical practices. The journal maintains its own publication ethics policies, informed by recognized international frameworks and professional guidance.
IRJSTEM of the State University of Northern Negros (SUNN) aims to disseminate the latest research findings and innovations in various fields of study through its online and print platforms. It ensures the quality of the manuscript for publication by confirming and verifying its academic integrity and adherence to the standards and policies of responsible conduct of research. This policy is also established to emphasize the importance of meeting and maintaining the highest quality of ethical standards and scientific validity. It encourages authors to commit to practicing credibility and professionalism, geared towards a culture of excellence through collaboration with the international research community in publication.
The following external organizations and documents provide relevant ethical principles and recommendations.
1. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
IRJSTEM refers to the COPE Core Practices when developing and implementing policies related to publication integrity, authorship, peer review, conflicts of interest, ethical oversight, allegations of misconduct, and post-publication corrections and retractions.
Official guidance:
COPE Core Practices
https://publicationethics.org/files/editable-bean/COPE_Core_Practices_0.pdf
Reference to COPE guidance does not constitute a claim of COPE membership or endorsement.
2. World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
IRJSTEM refers to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, jointly developed by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME, as guidance for maintaining transparency, editorial independence, ethical publishing practices, and research integrity.
Official Guideline:
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, Version 4 (2022).
Reference to this guidance does not imply membership in or endorsement by these organizations.
3. World Medical Association (WMA) — Declaration of Helsinki
Medical research involving human participants, including research involving identifiable human material or data, must comply with applicable institutional, national, and international ethical requirements. Where applicable, authors must consider the principles established in the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki, as revised in 2024. Authors must report relevant ethics committee approval, informed consent arrangements, and safeguards protecting research participants in accordance with applicable requirements.
Official document:
WMA Declaration of Helsinki — Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Participants
https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-declaration-of-helsinki/
4. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
IRJSTEM adopts the four ICMJE authorship criteria and refers to the ICMJE recommendations when addressing author responsibility, accountability, contribution disclosure, and appropriate acknowledgment.
Official guidance:
Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors
https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html
5. Implementation and Responsibility
IRJSTEM’s published editorial policies determine the specific obligations of authors, reviewers, editors, and other participants in the journal’s publication process. References to external ethical guidance are provided for transparency and appropriate attribution. Such references do not imply organizational membership, certification, accreditation, or endorsement unless these relationships are separately documented and explicitly disclosed. IRJSTEM is responsible for consistently implementing its published ethical policies and updating relevant references when authoritative guidance changes.
Generative AI
Standard policies for generative AI in academic and scientific research center on transparency, full human accountability, data privacy, and the absolute prohibition of AI authorship.
1. Authorship & Attribution
No AI Co-Authorship: Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors, or cited as originators of a work, because they cannot assume legal accountability, hold copyright, or verify their own output. Mandatory Disclosure: Researchers must openly declare if and how generative AI was used (e.g., in the Methods, Acknowledgments, or dedicated disclosure sections).
Tool Specifications: Disclosures should state the specific tool name, version number, date, and the exact scope/task it assisted with (such as language refinement, coding, or literature organization).
2. Human Oversight & Responsibility
Full Accountability: Human authors retain 100% legal and ethical responsibility for the entire manuscript, including any errors, fabrications, or biases generated by an AI tool.
Verification of Outputs: Every AI-generated fact, statistic, citation, calculation, and summary must be manually checked against primary sources, as models are prone to hallucinations and fabricated references.
Editorial & Reviewer Integrity: Editors and peer reviewers are typically prohibited from uploading confidential manuscripts or peer-review notes into public or external AI tools due to data leakage risks.
3. Data Privacy, Ethics & Security
Confidentiality: Entering unpublished manuscripts, proprietary datasets, or identifiable human-subject/patient data into open-access or public LLMs violates participant privacy and institutional review board (IRB) rules.
Appropriate Use Cases: AI is generally permitted for non-substantive or supportive tasks (grammar polishing, translation, formatting, or organizing ideas), whereas using it to fabricate primary data, manipulate graphs, or generate unverified core analysis is considered research misconduct.