Authors
Accuracy, originality, appropriate authorship, ethical approvals, transparent declarations and responsibility for the submitted work.
PUBLICATION ETHICS
Publication Ethics
Standards for authors, reviewers and editors before and after publication.
Reviewers
Confidentiality, impartiality, constructive assessment and disclosure of conflicts of interest.
Editors
Independent decisions, fair evaluation, conflict management and protection of the scholarly record.
Research and publication integrity
IJIRTI expects submitted work to be accurate, original and presented without fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, inappropriate image/data manipulation, duplicate publication or misleading attribution. Authors remain accountable for all content, including material prepared with AI-assisted tools.
Authorship and contributorship
Authorship should be limited to contributors who made substantial intellectual contributions and can take responsibility for the work. Gift, guest and ghost authorship are unacceptable. Contribution statements should be supplied when requested, and authorship changes after submission require a transparent explanation and agreement of the affected contributors.
Research involving humans, animals or identifiable information
Where applicable, manuscripts must identify ethics/IRB approval, relevant consent procedures and safeguards for privacy and confidentiality. Identifiable participant information or images require appropriate permission for publication. Authors are responsible for compliance with applicable institutional and legal requirements.
Suspected misconduct and corrections
Concerns may be raised before or after publication. The journal may request source data, ethics documentation, author explanations or other relevant records. Depending on the evidence, the journal may correct the article, issue an editorial notice, retract the work or take other proportionate action. Investigations should be evidence-based and handled with appropriate confidentiality.
Complaints and appeals
Authors may submit a reasoned appeal or complaint to the Editorial Office. Appeals should identify the specific editorial or scientific point being challenged rather than merely disagreeing with the outcome. Where practical, a matter should be reviewed by an editor who was not the sole decision-maker in the disputed step.