Ethics Statement
IDC International Journal is committed to rigorous peer review, careful editorial judgment, and transparent publishing practice.
Guiding principles
IDC International Journal upholds high standards of critical scholarly review and professional publishing judgment. Thorough peer review is combined with careful editorial oversight. Editors are supported in managing the journal ethically and transparently, in line with established editorial principles in their field.
For Editors
Editorial decisions must be fair, confidential, and free from conflicts of interest.
-
Neutrality
The intellectual content of submitted manuscripts is evaluated regardless of race, gender orientation, age, disability, religion, ethnicity, or political philosophy of the authors.
-
Confidentiality
All manuscripts should be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to anyone without the permission of the editor. Managers and editorial staff should not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone except the author, reviewers, and potential reviewers.
-
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished data contained in the submitted manuscript must not be used by editors or reviewers in their own research without the explicit consent of the author.
-
Decision on publication
The editor decides on the publication of submitted articles, guided by Editorial Board policy and legal obligations regarding defamation, copyrights, and plagiarism. The editor may share the decision with other Editorial Board members or with reviewers.
For Reviewers
Peer review should be timely, objective, and respectful of authors and their work.
-
Editorial decisions
Reviewers assist the editorial staff in making decisions and may also help the author improve the quality of the manuscript.
-
Delays and deadlines
When a reviewer cannot evaluate the research in time, or is unable to provide a report promptly, she or he must inform the editor without delay.
-
Objectivity, civility and respect
Reports must be objective. Personal remarks, criticisms directed at the author, or hurtful remarks about the text are not acceptable. The reviewer’s opinion must be clear, well argued, and respectful.
-
Indication of sources
The reviewer must identify appropriate publications not cited by the author, with an appropriate comment. The reviewer should also draw the editor’s attention to any similarity or overlap between the manuscript and previously published data.
-
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Information and ideas obtained through anonymous review are confidential and should not be used for personal benefit. Reviewers should not accept manuscripts where a conflict of interest may arise from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors.