Editorial Policy

If it is reported that a manuscript has been submitted to another journal or publisher at the same time, TSRJ will temporarily halt processing of the submission while the matter is investigated. Should the Editor or TSRJ determine that duplication has occurred and find ethical concerns with the submission, the manuscript will be rejected without further review.

TSRJ recognises the growing role of artificial intelligence (AI) in research and writing. We welcome its responsible use to support authors in generating ideas, speeding up discovery, analysing results, improving clarity, and structuring manuscripts.

While AI tools—particularly large language models (LLMs) and generative AI—can be valuable, they cannot replace human creativity, judgment, and critical thinking. This policy aims to guide authors, reviewers, and editors in making ethical and transparent use of such technology.

For Authors

AI Assistance

Authors may use AI-assisted tools that improve language, grammar, or structure without disclosure, as these are considered supportive technologies. However, authors remain fully responsible for ensuring that their work is accurate and meets scholarly standards.

Generative AI

If AI tools are used to generate text, images, references, or any other content, this must be clearly disclosed at the time of submission. Authors should cite original sources, not the AI tool itself, in their references.

When using generative AI, authors are expected to:

• Clearly state in the manuscript (methods or acknowledgements) which tool was used and for what purpose.
• Check and verify accuracy, validity, and reliability of AI-generated content or citations, correcting errors or biases.
• Ensure AI-generated text is not directly taken from other works without proper attribution (avoid plagiarism).
• Confirm no fabricated information, data, or false citations are included.

Note: AI tools (such as ChatGPT) cannot be listed as an author on any submission.

While AI use will not automatically disqualify a manuscript, undisclosed or inappropriate use (e.g., plagiarism, fabricated references, or inaccuracies) may result in rejection at any stage of the publishing process.

For Reviewers and Editors

The use of AI or large language models (LLMs) in editorial work raises important concerns around confidentiality and copyright. These tools “learn” from the data they process and may reuse it, which can put sensitive research at risk.

AI Assistance

• Reviewers may use AI tools to polish the language of their reviews. They remain fully responsible for accuracy and constructiveness.
• Journal Editors hold overall responsibility for published content. They may use AI tools to help identify reviewers, but not for decision-making.

Generative AI

• Reviewers must not use ChatGPT or other generative AI tools to draft full review reports. Such reviews will be rejected, and the reviewer excluded from future invitations.
• Editors must not use generative AI tools to write decision letters or summaries of unpublished research.

Undisclosed or Inappropriate Use of Generative AI

• If reviewers suspect undisclosed or inappropriate AI use in a manuscript, they should notify the Journal Editor.
• If Editors suspect inappropriate AI use in a manuscript or review, they should apply this policy in their assessment or contact TSRJ for guidance.

TSRJ and the Journal Editor will jointly investigate concerns about AI misuse in published work. All investigations will follow COPE guidance and TSRJ’s internal policies.

TSRJ accepts short commentaries, letters to the editor, or critiques (collectively referred to as critiques) that respond to previously published articles. These submissions are intended to express alternative viewpoints, highlight different perspectives, or raise concerns about a specific topic. Typically, only one critique is considered for each article published in a TSRJ journal or elsewhere, and such submissions may be subject to word count limits. Please check the specific journal’s submission guidelines for details.

Assessment of Critiques

For fairness and transparency, TSRJ requires that all critiques be assessed by the journal editor for their accuracy, relevance, and overall contribution. If a critique includes original research data, it should undergo peer review by subject experts chosen by the editor. Where a critique identifies significant errors or omissions in a TSRJ publication, the journal manager should be notified immediately so that TSRJ can act in line with its corrections and retractions policy.

Author Responses

Following COPE guidance, authors of the original article should be given an opportunity to respond to any critique before it is published. If both the authors and editors agree, this response may be published. TSRJ also recommends applying a consistent process: critiques, author responses, and rejoinders should all receive the same editorial and peer review scrutiny. If the original article was published outside TSRJ, the editor and author of that journal should also be informed, and this should be noted when the critique is published.

Example Process

1. A commentary on a published article is submitted to the journal → subject to peer review.
2. The commentary is shared with the original authors → they are invited to submit a response, subject to peer review.
3. The response may then be shared with the commentator → who may submit a rejoinder, subject to peer review.
4. The rejoinder is shared with the original authors.

If accepted, the commentary, the author’s response, and the rejoinder are all published together in the same issue. Once published, no further correspondence on the matter is considered for publication.

General Concerns or Complaints

Anyone who wishes to raise a concern or make a complaint about any aspect of publishing in a TSRJ journal, or working with TSRJ or its publishing partners, may email [email protected]. Please note that TSRJ staff do not influence or comment on editorial decisions for any of our journals.

TSRJ aims to acknowledge receipt of complaints within five business days. After that, our Research Integrity and Inclusion Manager will lead the investigation in line with COPE guidelines. The process will review whether appropriate procedures were followed, examine the submission history, and check correspondence between the author, editor, and reviewers. Additional information may be requested from the involved parties, always handled in compliance with GDPR regulations.

The complainant will be informed of the outcome in writing. We aim to resolve cases as quickly as possible, ideally within six weeks, though some investigations may take longer depending on the complexity, number of authors, papers involved, or the need to consult institutions or external parties.

To allow fair and thorough consideration, we ask complainants to refrain from making public statements until the process is complete. If the author is not satisfied with the outcome, they may take the matter further by contacting COPE directly.

Complaints About Published Content

All concerns about published content are handled confidentially and according to COPE guidance, regardless of who raises them. In some cases, an internal review will determine if a full investigation is needed. Where necessary, investigations will involve collaboration with the authors and the journal editor. External experts, author institutions, or funders may also be contacted when required, in accordance with GDPR.

We protect the complainant’s anonymity wherever possible, but in some cases, their identity may be inferred from the nature of the concern. Once an investigation concludes, complainants will be informed of the outcome. To preserve confidentiality, we do not provide ongoing progress updates during the review.

Appealing Editorial Decisions

Editors have wide discretion in determining whether a submission is suitable for their journal. Many submissions may be declined without peer review, often with only a brief explanation. These decisions are not open to appeal.

However, if an author believes that their manuscript was rejected in a way that did not follow the journal’s stated policies or procedures, they may submit an appeal. This must include a detailed, point-by-point response to reviewer and editor comments. The editor will then review whether the peer-review process was handled appropriately. If the decision aligns with editorial criteria, the editor’s rejection is final.

In keeping with our policy of editorial independence, TSRJ staff do not mediate disagreements between authors and editors regarding final editorial decisions.

Appealing Corrective Actions Post-Publication

When concerns are raised about a published article, the editor—guided by COPE’s recommendations and in consultation with TSRJ—will decide if a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is necessary. This aligns with our responsibility to maintain a transparent and reliable scholarly record.

Authors may appeal a corrective action if new evidence comes to light before the specified deadline. Appeals will be reviewed by TSRJ and, where appropriate, may involve the editor, editorial board, or external scientific advisors. However, once a final decision on a retraction or expression of concern is made, no further appeals will be considered.

Version of Record (VoR)

Once an article is published in its final form, it is considered the Version of Record (VoR)—the accurate, complete, and definitive source for citation. For TSRJ, the VoR is either (1) the article published within a volume and issue, or (2) the first published version for journals using a continuous publication model (Open Access). The VoR also includes any approved post-publication corrections. Continuous publication journals do not release separate paginated versions.

Post-Publication Corrections

TSRJ may issue post-publication notices when changes to the VoR are required, including:

• Errors or omissions affecting readability, discoverability, indexing, or policy compliance
• Issues raising concerns about the validity, reliability, or overall integrity of the article

Errors or Omissions Affecting Readability, Indexing, or Policy Compliance

Because articles are citable immediately (including OnlineFirst), later changes can affect readers who accessed earlier versions. Authors review proofs before publication to minimize issues; however, corrections may still be necessary. These are considered at the discretion of the journal and TSRJ, and not all requests can be accommodated.

Correction Notice

A correction notice is issued when an error or omission significantly affects reading, comprehension, or interpretation. For substantial factual mistakes or major errors, a corrigendum (author error) or erratum (publisher error) will be published and linked to the article. If updates are made directly within the article, a correction footnote will indicate changes and link to the relevant corrigendum/erratum.

If multiple major issues raise concerns about reliability, TSRJ will investigate with the Journal Editor (following COPE guidelines) and, if needed, prepare a corrigendum with the authors and editor. Minor errors may be footnoted within the article.

Errors or Concerns Related to Article Validity or Integrity

Concerns affecting validity or integrity are investigated per COPE guidance and TSRJ policies, consistent with our Complaints & Appeals procedures.

Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when:

• Serious issues could mislead readers
• Credible concerns arise regarding research or publication misconduct
• Strong concerns are raised but the investigation remains inconclusive
• An ongoing investigation is expected to take significant time

Authors will be informed but their approval is not required. TSRJ may publish relevant materials (e.g., figures, data) for transparency and, where necessary, contact institutions or other publishers. The notice links directly to the article and may later be replaced by a corrigendum or retraction, or remain permanently if no conclusion is reached.

Retractions

TSRJ follows COPE’s retraction guidelines. A retraction alerts readers when an article contains serious errors or integrity breaches. Retraction may occur if, after investigation and editorial review, the findings or conclusions are deemed unreliable.

Retraction triggers include (but are not limited to):

• Significant errors (unintentional or due to research/publication misconduct)
• Compromised peer review leading to acceptance
• Failure of authors to address concerns or queries satisfactorily
• Inability to verify authors’ identities or provide data/images/evidence supporting authorship and findings

Authors may also request retraction by emailing [email protected]. Requests are reviewed by the Journal Editor and TSRJ and may be declined if inconsistent with COPE/TSRJ policy or during an ongoing TSRJ-led investigation.

Retraction notices clearly state reasons and remain permanently linked to the original article. Authors are informed and invited to comment, though approval is not required. Retractions are reconsidered only if new evidence emerges. See our Complaints & Appeals policy for more information.

TSRJ may also publish materials, data, or figures provided during investigations for transparency and, where necessary, inform institutions or other publishers if multiple works are implicated.

Note: Article Processing Charges (APCs) are not refunded when an article is retracted.

Removal

TSRJ follows International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM) guidance on preserving the permanent record. Articles (or parts) are removed only in exceptional, legally required circumstances, such as:

• Breaches of participant privacy
• Content errors that could pose risks to public safety if acted upon
• Defamatory statements about individuals or their work

Corrections to Supplemental Material and Research Data Files

Supplemental files are part of the permanent record. These and research data files may be hosted in open-access repositories with DOIs. For significant changes, TSRJ may issue a formal notice. Minor, non-substantive updates may be made by replacing the file directly. Version details are clearly noted on the first page of the updated file.

Name Change Policy

As part of TSRJ’s commitment to fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion across research communities, we have introduced a policy that allows authors to request changes to their name or pronouns. All such requests will be respected, whether they arise from marriage, divorce, gender affirmation, religious conversion, or other personal reasons. Authors will not be asked to provide proof or documentation, and no correction notice will be published.

Traditionally, the academic record has been slow to accommodate such updates, since corrections were limited to author or publisher errors and required public notices. To overcome this barrier and safeguard author privacy, TSRJ has worked with publishing partners to ensure name and pronoun changes are implemented seamlessly.

When a request is made, the relevant article(s) will be republished online in full. This ensures the updated author name is reflected in indexing services such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, while citation details like the DOI remain unchanged. As a result, all prior citations of the article remain valid.

To support co-authors, we encourage authors making a name change to notify their collaborators so that future citations are consistent. TSRJ can inform co-authors on the author’s behalf, or the author may choose to contact them directly—or not at all.

Please note that typographical errors in author names will be corrected through TSRJ’s standard post-publication correction process. Updates to affiliations or email addresses that are unrelated to a name change will not be covered by this policy.

TSRJ is continually refining this policy, guided by best practices such as those outlined in COPE’s “A vision for a more trans-inclusive publishing world” . While it may not yet be possible to remove all previous name records from every public-facing system, we are actively exploring improvements to expand this capability.

As with other policies, TSRJ reserves the right to review and address any misuse of this process.

Requesting a Change

Authors wishing to update their name and/or pronouns can submit a request through our authorship guidelines page, providing:

• Previously published name
• Updated name
• Pronoun update (if applicable)
• Email contact
• Relevant article DOIs
• Preference on whether TSRJ should notify co-authors (Yes / No)

Selecting “No” ensures complete privacy, while choosing “Yes” authorizes TSRJ to contact co-authors about the change.

Page and Publication Charges

Some subscription-based journals apply page or publication fees to authors as part of the publishing process. In the past, there has been some confusion when these charges coincided with open access (OA) fees, leaving uncertainty about what authors were expected to pay. To address this, TSRJ clarified its policy in July 2022.

There are two main pathways for making an article in a subscription journal open access:

1. TSRJ Choice – when an author requests that their article be published as OA.
2. Open Access Sales Deals (OASD) – when the article qualifies under one of TSRJ’s OA agreements.

Even if an article is published open access under these routes, authors may still be responsible for other charges set by the journal, such as page, publication, or color charges.

Terms and Definitions

• Page Charges: A fixed cost per published page (e.g., $75–$150 per page). Applied only after acceptance. Final invoice issued after copyediting and typesetting.
• Publication Charges: A set fee per article (e.g., $775) incurred after peer review and acceptance. Rates should be clearly stated in author guidelines.
• Color Charges: Most journals allow color figures online at no cost, but some still charge for printing color in the print edition (e.g., $800 for the first image, $200 for each additional one).

TSRJ’s Stance on Abusive Behavior and Bullying in Editorial Processes

At TSRJ, we are fully committed to ensuring that every individual involved in our editorial and publishing processes is treated with dignity, respect, and fairness. We maintain a zero-tolerance approach toward abusive behavior, harassment, or bullying directed at our staff, editors, editorial board members, authors, reviewers, or any other party connected with the publishing process. We also reserve the right to decline or discontinue publishing relationships if they conflict with these core values.

We do not accept conduct—whether verbal, written, or behavioral—that is offensive, threatening, humiliating, malicious, or causes distress or harm to others. Such actions may occur in any context, including digital or electronic communications, and may arise from a single incident.

All individuals engaged in research, writing, submission, peer review, editorial decision-making, and publication are expected to uphold these principles and interact respectfully at all times. Where abusive or bullying behavior is identified, TSRJ reserves the right to disengage from the individual(s) involved and may take additional action if deemed necessary to safeguard the integrity and dignity of the editorial process.

Editorial Independence at TSRJ

TSRJ is firmly committed to protecting editorial independence and ensuring that commercial interests never influence editorial decision-making or peer-review processes. Upholding independence in publishing is a cornerstone of our values, aligned with best practice guidelines set by COPE, WAME, and ICMJE.

Our journal editors maintain full authority over the selection of articles and the peer-review process. As a publisher, TSRJ recognizes its duty to safeguard independent editorial judgment while enabling free academic expression grounded in scholarly rigor. At the same time, we ensure accountability and adherence to ethical standards throughout the publication process. Editorial decisions must always be based on the quality of research, the validity of findings, and the contribution to academic knowledge, rather than on potential commercial outcomes.

To support this principle:

• Editors have full independence in determining whether a manuscript should enter peer review and may reject submissions without external interference if they do not meet the required quality, scope, or standards.
• Decisions to accept manuscripts must be based on the evaluations of at least two independent peer reviewers who are experts in the field, along with the Editor’s own professional judgment.
• Any complaints about editorial decisions are handled by the Journal Editor or the Editorial Board.
• TSRJ staff do not participate in or influence individual editorial decisions. However, they may work with editors to address ethical issues if concerns are raised.

Submission to a TSRJ Journal

TSRJ follows the COPE Guidelines when addressing potential cases of redundant publication. To avoid corrective measures after publication, authors must fully disclose any prior publication or public distribution of their manuscript at the time of submission. Proper attribution to earlier work must be included in the manuscript, and any quoted material should be clearly identified so that readers can trace it back to the original source.

If a significant portion of a manuscript has already been published, it will generally not be considered for publication in a TSRJ journal. However, depending on each journal’s specific policy, there may be situations where previously shared material could still be acceptable. Authors should carefully review the Instructions for Authors on the journal’s website and provide details of any prior distribution when submitting their manuscript, as well as within the manuscript itself.

Examples of Potentially Acceptable Prior Distribution

• Preprints and working papers: Manuscripts posted on preprint servers or collaboration networks (e.g., TSRJ’s Advance, bioRxiv, ResearchGate, Academia.edu). While TSRJ supports early sharing, some journals may restrict submissions that have appeared as preprints.
• Dissertations and theses: Content from institutional archives is typically eligible if it has not undergone peer review. If the submitted work closely overlaps with already published material, it may be unsuitable.
• Conference material: Abstracts, posters, or presentations may be acceptable if not formally published, and if the author still retains rights. Editors will also consider whether the submitted article adds significant value.
• Raw data and clinical trial registries: Manuscripts using previously referenced datasets can be eligible. Authors must disclose prior uses and secure permissions if reproducing organized/compiled data created by others.

Authors should also be aware that in journals using double-anonymized peer review, preprints or uploads to collaboration networks may make their identities visible to reviewers. While this does not automatically disqualify submissions, authors should weigh this possibility before posting preprints.

After Submission to a TSRJ Journal

Once a manuscript is submitted, authors should not post updated versions until the editorial decision is made. If the article is accepted, authors may share their work in accordance with TSRJ’s author archiving and reuse policy. However, the final published PDF (formatted version) cannot be shared on open platforms such as preprint servers, personal websites, repositories, or networks like ResearchGate, Academia.edu, or Mendeley, unless a license explicitly permits it.

At TSRJ, we are dedicated to promoting openness, transparency, and reproducibility in scholarly research. We strongly encourage researchers to make their data accessible, discoverable, citable, and acknowledged as a valuable intellectual resource. TSRJ supports the Centre for Open Science’s Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines, is an active member of the STM Research Data Group, and endorses the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles.

What Counts as Research Data?

Research data includes any information collected, observed, generated, or created to support and validate original research findings. It can take many forms—numerical, descriptive, aural, or visual—and varies by discipline. Examples range from spreadsheets and datasets to qualitative materials such as interview transcripts, field notes, or visual recordings.

Journal Policies on Data Sharing

TSRJ journals may differ in their data-sharing requirements, but most follow a minimum standard. Authors are encouraged—while respecting ethical and legal obligations—to share, cite, and link their research data whenever possible. Each journal may adopt one of the following approaches:

Option 1: Encouragement (Recommended)

• Authors are encouraged to deposit their data in an appropriate public repository.
• A data availability statement should explain where the data can be accessed, or clarify why sharing is not possible.
• Data should be cited in the manuscript.

Option 2: Requirement (Mandatory)

• Authors must deposit their data in a suitable public repository.
• A data availability statement is required, indicating whether data is available and where, why it cannot be shared, or if no data exists.
• Data must be properly cited in the publication.
• Authors unable to comply should contact the editorial office.

Option 3: Verification (Mandatory with Peer Review)

• Authors must deposit data in a public repository.
• A data availability statement is required, as in Option 2.
• Data must be cited within the article.
• Peer reviewers may be asked to evaluate the research data itself before publication.

What is Research Data?

Research data refers to information gathered, observed, produced, or developed to support and confirm original research results. Examples range from spreadsheets with measurable figures to qualitative sources like transcripts or field notes.

Why is Open Research Data Important?

Open sharing helps validate and reproduce results, accelerates discoveries, and increases transparency. Repositories with permanent identifiers (DOIs) ensure long-term preservation and proper citation.

How to Find the Research Data Policy?

Policies differ by journal. Review the Submission Guidelines on the journal’s homepage and check your funder’s requirements.

What License Terms Can I Use?

If no strict requirements exist, you may choose license terms. Open licenses such as CC0 or CC BY are encouraged. Options include:

• Share upon request: Make data available upon request, with conditions.
• Share with restrictions: Provide access but restrict reuse with a license.
• Open data: Make data fully open with a license such as CC0 or CC BY.

Ethical, Legal, or Commercial Concerns

Authors are not required to share data that could identify participants or sensitive information without consent. Alternatives include:

• Deposit data in a controlled-access repository (e.g., Figshare, Zenodo, OSF).
• Anonymize sensitive data.
• Share only metadata.
• Allow access upon request.
• Use hybrid approaches such as redacted datasets with restricted access.

How to Share Data in a Repository?

Use repositories such as Repository Finder, FAIRsharing, or re3data.org. Prefer discipline-specific repositories, or trusted general repositories if none exist.

Repositories should:

• Provide a persistent identifier (DOI)
• Have a long-term preservation plan

What is a Data Availability Statement (DAS)?

A DAS explains where supporting data can be found. It should specify whether data are open, restricted, or unavailable, and include persistent links (DOIs) where possible.

Examples of DAS statements:

• “The datasets generated during this study are available in the [NAME] repository, [LINK].”
• “The datasets are not publicly available due to [REASON] but may be obtained from the corresponding author on request.”
• “The datasets used are available from the corresponding author on request.”
• “Data sharing is not applicable as no new datasets were generated or analyzed.”
• “All data supporting this study are included in this article and its supplementary files.”
• “The data used were obtained from [THIRD PARTY] under license and are not publicly available.”

How to Cite a Dataset?

If deposited in a repository with a DOI, include a dataset citation in your references. TSRJ recommends the DataCite format:

Creator (Year). Title. Publisher. Identifier

Examples:

• Smith, J., & Lee, A. (2021). Soil temperature readings from northern India, 2015–2020. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1234567
• Johnson, R. (2019). Interview transcripts on urban housing policies. Figshare. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.9876543

If no DOI is available, include as much detail as possible (author, year, title, repository name, stable link).

Submitting to a Double-Anonymized Journal

If submitting to a double-anonymized journal requiring data sharing, ensure datasets remain anonymous. Use repositories that allow anonymization (e.g., Figshare private links). Private links:

• Can be included in the manuscript for reviewers
• Do not require reviewer accounts
• Hide author identity
• Are valid for one year

Note: Private links must not be cited in the published article. Provide a permanent link after acceptance.

What are OSF Open Practice Badges?

The Open Science Framework (OSF) awards badges to promote transparency and reproducibility. Badges may indicate:

• Open Data Badge: All shareable data required to reproduce results are made available in a public repository.
• Open Materials Badge: All materials required to reproduce the methodology are openly available.
• Preregistered Badge: Study design and analysis plans were preregistered in an open repository.
  • TC (Transparent Changes): Plan was modified later with documented rationale.
  • DE (Data Exist): Registration occurred after data collection but before analysis.

Some TSRJ journals use OSF badges to demonstrate compliance with Open Data policies. Check journal submission guidelines for eligibility. For details, visit the Open Science Framework website.

Authors who wish to publish their work without their names must send a written request to the Journal Editor and TSRJ, explaining the reasons for seeking anonymity. Valid reasons may include issues of personal safety, privacy concerns, or other sensitive circumstances. All such requests and the reasons provided will be handled with strict confidentiality.

Review Process

Each request will be carefully reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Journal Editor and TSRJ, following COPE’s established guidance.

Contact

For further information or to submit an anonymity request, authors should contact the Journal Editor and TSRJ at [email protected].

TSRJ is committed to maintaining the highest standards of research and publication ethics. We take plagiarism, copyright infringement, and any breach of scholarly practice very seriously. Protecting the rights of authors and readers while safeguarding the integrity of the journal is our top priority.

Screening for Plagiarism

All submitted manuscripts may be screened with plagiarism-detection software. If an article is found to contain copied material, third-party content without permission or acknowledgment, or unresolved authorship disputes, TSRJ reserves the right to take corrective action.

Possible Actions

• Publishing a correction or clarification
• Retracting the article
• Informing the author’s institution or relevant authorities
• In severe cases, initiating legal measures

Author Responsibilities

Authors must disclose any prior distribution or publication of their work, whether partial or complete, at the time of submission. Proper acknowledgment of reused material is required. Failure to do so may result in disqualification.

Fraudulent Activities

TSRJ does not tolerate fraudulent activities, including manipulation of the peer review process or the use of illegitimate review services. Where strong suspicion or evidence exists, submissions will be rejected immediately. If misconduct is discovered post-publication, TSRJ will investigate under COPE guidance and may issue corrections or retractions as needed.