1. General Statement

JAEM expects original, accurate, and ethical scholarship. Submissions must not be under consideration elsewhere and must be the authors' own work. The journal follows COPE flowcharts and core practices when handling ethical cases. Editors will take action for suspected misconduct, including corrections, expressions of concern, or retraction when necessary. :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

2. Responsibilities of Authors

• Originality & novelty: Manuscripts must be original, not published previously, and not submitted simultaneously to another journal.
• Authorship: All persons listed as authors must meet accepted authorship criteria (substantial contribution to conception/design, data acquisition/analysis, drafting/revising, and final approval). Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged. Authors must declare the specific contributions of each author. 
• Plagiarism & attribution: Plagiarism, including text recycling/self-plagiarism without disclosure, is unacceptable. Authors must properly cite sources and obtain permission for reproduced material. Manuscripts may be screened with similarity-check tools. 
• Data, reproducibility & transparency: Authors must accurately report methods and results, describe data sources, and, where possible, provide access to underlying data and analysis code or describe how data may be accessed.
• Ethical approval: For research involving human participants or animals, authors must state approval from an appropriate ethics committee and include informed consent statements where applicable.
• Conflicts of interest & funding: Authors must disclose all financial and non-financial competing interests and funding sources that could influence the work. 
• Use of AI/assistive technologies: Any substantive use of AI tools in manuscript production must be transparently disclosed; AI tools cannot be named as authors. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the content. 

3. Responsibilities of Editors & Journal

• Editorial independence: Editorial decisions are made independently and based solely on scholarly merit, relevance, and ethical compliance.
• Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential and must not use information in them for personal gain.
• Conflicts of interest: Editors must disclose and manage any personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest and recuse themselves if necessary.
• Handling misconduct: Editors will follow COPE guidance and flowcharts to investigate allegations of misconduct, contacting authors' institutions if needed, and issuing corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern as appropriate. :contentReference[oaicite:6]{index=6}
• Timely decision-making: The journal commits to fair and timely peer review and will publish clear peer-review and appeals procedures.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Objectivity & confidentiality: Reviewers should provide constructive, unbiased, and timely reviews and must keep manuscripts confidential.
• Conflict of interest: Reviewers must decline assignments where conflicts exist (competitor, collaborator, close personal relationship, or financial interest) and must disclose any potential biases. :contentReference[oaicite:7]{index=7}
• Respect for intellectual property: Reviewers should not appropriate ideas, data, or text from manuscripts under review.
• Reporting concerns: Reviewers should notify editors of any suspected ethical problems, including plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabricated data, or unethical research practices. :contentReference[oaicite:8]{index=8}

5. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

JAEM will investigate alleged cases of misconduct (plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, image manipulation, redundant publication, unethical research) following COPE recommended procedures. The investigation may include contacting authors, reviewers, institutions, and funders. If evidence supports serious misconduct, the journal may issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions, and inform indexing services. Editors may use plagiarism-detection tools and request raw data or ethics documentation during investigations. :contentReference[oaicite:9]{index=9}

6. Authorship Disputes

Disputes about authorship should be raised with the editorial office with supporting documentation. The journal will follow COPE flowcharts and may request statements from all parties and the authors' institutions. Changes to authorship after submission (addition, removal, re-ordering) require written agreement from all authors. :contentReference[oaicite:10]{index=10}

7. Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern

JAEM follows best-practice guidance when correcting the literature. Errata/corrigenda will be published for minor errors that do not invalidate findings. Retractions will be issued for invalid or fraudulent results; expressions of concern may be published while investigations are ongoing. Retraction notices will explain reasons and who is responsible. :contentReference[oaicite:11]{index=11}

8. Data Availability & Reproducibility

Authors are encouraged to deposit data and code in a trusted repository or provide a clear statement about data availability. Where data cannot be shared (e.g., confidentiality, legal restrictions), authors must explain how results can be validated. Transparent reporting and reproducible methods strengthen trust in published findings. :contentReference[oaicite:12]{index=12}

9. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

JAEM requires authors to disclose any use of AI/large language models or other automated tools in manuscript preparation (e.g., for drafting text, editing, data analysis). AI tools cannot be recorded as authors and any AI-generated text or data must be checked, validated, and attributed appropriately by the human authors. This aligns with current international recommendations. :contentReference[oaicite:13]{index=13}

10. Privacy & Confidentiality

Personal data disclosed in submissions (e.g., participant details, reviewer identities) will be handled in accordance with applicable privacy laws and only used for editorial purposes. Peer review is confidential; reviewer identities are only revealed with explicit consent or as part of a transparent peer-review process if applicable.

11. Sanctions & Enforcement

When breaches of these policies are confirmed, possible sanctions include rejection, correction, retraction, notification to employers/institutions, and banning from future submissions for a defined period. Severity of sanctions depends on the nature and gravity of the misconduct.