Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

INDIS 2026 - International Conference on Design & Innovation Studies

INDIS 2026 is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics, transparency, and academic integrity in accordance with internationally recognized frameworks, including COPE, Elsevier guidelines, and Scopus requirements.

This statement defines the ethical responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and the organizing committee, and establishes clear policies for peer review, originality, authorship, and the handling of misconduct to ensure the credibility and integrity of the conference proceedings.

INDIS 2026 – Author Guidelines

1. Commitment to Scopus-Aligned Standards

INDIS 2026 adheres to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and transparency, aligned with:

  • Scopus Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) requirements
  • Elsevier publication ethics guidelines
  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) principles

The conference ensures that all published proceedings meet rigorous academic, ethical, and peer-review standards required for Scopus-indexed content. Scopus explicitly requires:

  • A clearly defined and publicly available peer review process
  • A transparent ethics and malpractice statement
  • Evidence of high-quality, original, and ethically conducted research

2. Peer Review Policy

INDIS 2026 follows a rigorous double-blind peer review process:

  • Each submission is reviewed by at least two independent experts
  • Reviewers are selected from different institutions and geographies
  • Reviewers are not limited to the organizing committee
  • Evaluation criteria include originality, rigor, relevance, and contribution

This structure aligns with Scopus expectations for reviewer independence, multi-reviewer validation, and transparent workflows.

3. Originality, Plagiarism, and Similarity Screening

All submissions must be original and unpublished work.

  • Mandatory plagiarism screening using iThenticate or equivalent
  • Rejection of manuscripts with significant similarity
  • Prohibition of self-plagiarism (text recycling)

4. Authorship and Contributorship Transparency

  • Clear definition of each author’s contribution
  • Only contributors with substantial intellectual input are listed
  • All authors must approve the final manuscript

Guest authorship, ghost authorship, or undisclosed contributors are considered misconduct.

5. Data Integrity and Reproducibility

  • Accuracy and integrity of all reported data
  • No fabrication, falsification, or manipulation
  • Clear documentation of methods and analysis

Where applicable:

  • Data sources must be cited
  • Reproducibility must be supported

6. Ethical Oversight

For research involving human participants or sensitive contexts:

  • Ethical approval (IRB or equivalent) must be declared
  • Informed consent must be obtained
  • Privacy and confidentiality must be maintained

7. Conflict of Interest Disclosure

  • Financial, institutional, or personal conflicts must be disclosed
  • Editorial decisions remain independent of such conflicts

8. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers must:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality
  • Provide objective and constructive feedback
  • Declare conflicts of interest

Reviewers must not:

  • Use unpublished material for personal gain
  • Share manuscripts outside the review process

9. Responsibilities of Editors and Program Committee

  • Ensure transparent and fair peer review
  • Avoid bias or undue influence
  • Maintain clear documentation of editorial processes

10. Misconduct and Malpractice

The following constitute serious ethical violations:

  • Plagiarism and self-plagiarism
  • Duplicate or concurrent submissions
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Improper authorship attribution
  • Manipulation of peer review

11. Handling of Misconduct

  1. Detection: Through plagiarism tools, reviewers, or editorial checks
  2. Preliminary Assessment: Conducted by the Ethics Committee
  3. Formal Investigation: Authors contacted and evidence reviewed
  4. Decision and Action: May include rejection, retraction, or institutional notification

12. Corrections and Retractions

  • Publication of corrections (errata)
  • Retractions in cases of proven misconduct
  • Transparent post-publication updates

13. Intellectual Property and Copyright

  • Authors retain responsibility for ensuring no copyright infringement
  • Copyright and licensing terms are clearly stated in author guidelines
  • Proper attribution is mandatory for reused material