1. Purpose of this Editorial Policy

The Interdisciplinary Research Journal & Archives, known as IRJAR, is committed to responsible academic publishing. This Editorial Policy establishes the standards used to evaluate, edit, review, publish, correct, archive, and preserve scholarly work submitted to IRJAR.

The policy applies to journal articles, books, book chapters, review essays, case studies, commentary pieces, special issues, archives, and other scholarly or professional publications managed by IRJAR.

2. Editorial principles

IRJAR’s editorial work is guided by principles that protect the quality of publications and the trust of authors, readers, reviewers, institutions, and the wider academic community.

3. Scope of publication

IRJAR publishes interdisciplinary academic and professional work that contributes to knowledge, public understanding, institutional learning, community development, or scholarly debate.

IRJAR may consider:

• Original research articles.
• Review articles and literature reviews.
• Theoretical, conceptual, and analytical papers.
• Case studies and applied professional studies.
• Book chapters, edited volumes, and academic books.
• Commentaries, essays, research notes, and policy reflections.
• Special issues, conference proceedings, and archival publications.

IRJAR reserves the right to decline submissions that fall outside its scope, do not meet editorial standards, raise ethical concerns, or do not align with the platform’s scholarly mission.

4. Editorial independence

Editorial decisions are made independently and should not be improperly influenced by political pressure, personal relationships, institutional status, author identity, payment status, advertising interests, donor influence, or external pressure.

Publication fees, service payments, sponsorships, partnerships, or institutional relationships do not guarantee acceptance, peer-review approval, favorable editorial treatment, DOI registration, indexing, or publication.

5. Editorial responsibilities

IRJAR’s editorial process depends on responsible collaboration among editors, reviewers, authors, and administrative staff. Each role contributes to the credibility of the publication process.

6. Peer-review and editorial review process

Depending on the type of submission, IRJAR may use editorial screening, peer review, expert review, plagiarism review, formatting review, or publication-readiness review. The review pathway may vary for journal articles, books, special issues, commentary pieces, and archival publications.

7. Editorial decision categories

Editorial decisions are based on the manuscript’s quality, contribution, relevance, ethical compliance, clarity, originality, reviewer feedback, and readiness for publication.

8. Academic integrity and research ethics

IRJAR expects authors to submit original, properly cited, ethically prepared, and intellectually honest work. Authors are responsible for the accuracy of their claims, data, references, quotations, images, tables, figures, translations, and interpretations.

IRJAR may reject or investigate submissions involving:

• Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, or duplicate publication.
• Fabricated, falsified, or manipulated data.
• Improper authorship, ghost authorship, or undisclosed writing assistance.
• Undisclosed conflicts of interest or funding influence.
• Copyright infringement or unauthorized use of third-party materials.
• Defamatory, hateful, abusive, or unlawful content.
• Unethical research involving human participants, communities, interviews, or sensitive data.

IRJAR may use plagiarism detection tools, editorial judgment, reviewer assessment, author clarification, or external guidance to evaluate integrity concerns.

9. Conflicts of interest

Authors, reviewers, editors, and contributors must disclose conflicts of interest that could influence, or appear to influence, the evaluation, interpretation, or publication of a manuscript.

Conflicts may include:

• Financial relationships, sponsorships, grants, or consulting arrangements.
• Institutional, supervisory, or employment relationships.
• Personal, family, political, ideological, or professional relationships.
• Competition, rivalry, prior disputes, or direct collaboration with authors.
• Any relationship that may affect impartial editorial judgment.

Reviewers or editors who identify a significant conflict should decline the assignment or notify IRJAR immediately.

10. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted for review should be treated as confidential materials unless they have already been publicly posted or published by the author. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff should not share, copy, distribute, quote, or use submitted materials for personal benefit without authorization.

Reviewer comments, editorial correspondence, unpublished manuscripts, author records, and internal decisions should be handled with appropriate professional confidentiality.

11. Artificial intelligence, authorship, and editorial responsibility

IRJAR recognizes that artificial intelligence tools may assist authors with language editing, translation support, formatting, outlining, literature organization, or manuscript preparation. However, AI tools cannot replace author responsibility, scholarly judgment, ethical reasoning, or original contribution.

Authors must disclose AI use when:

• AI tools substantially generated, rewrote, translated, summarized, or structured manuscript content.
• AI tools contributed to data analysis, coding, image generation, tables, figures, or research synthesis.
• AI-generated material appears directly in the submitted manuscript.

Authors are responsible for checking the accuracy, originality, citations, and integrity of any content prepared with AI assistance. AI tools should not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the work.

12. Corrections, withdrawals, expressions of concern, and retractions

IRJAR is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. When concerns arise after publication, IRJAR may issue corrections, updates, expressions of concern, withdrawals, or retractions depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue.

Retractions and corrections should be handled transparently while respecting fairness, evidence, author response, legal considerations, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

13. Appeals, complaints, and editorial disputes

Authors may contact IRJAR if they believe an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding, factual error, procedural concern, or conflict of interest. Appeals should be respectful, evidence-based, and focused on the manuscript’s scholarly merits.

Appeals should include:

• The manuscript title.
• The author’s full name and contact information.
• The original editorial decision, if available.
• A clear explanation of the concern.
• Specific evidence supporting the appeal.

IRJAR may uphold the original decision, request additional review, invite revision, or decline further consideration. Repeated, abusive, or unsupported appeals may not receive additional review.

14. Scholarly record, metadata, DOI, and archiving

IRJAR values the long-term preservation and discoverability of academic work. Accepted publications may include public metadata such as title, author name, affiliation, abstract, keywords, references, publication date, DOI, and citation information.

Once a publication is released, its metadata may be deposited, indexed, cited, archived, shared, or discovered through external systems. IRJAR cannot guarantee removal from all external databases, repositories, search engines, DOI systems, or academic platforms after publication metadata has been distributed.

15. Contact for editorial matters

Authors, reviewers, editors, institutions, and readers may contact IRJAR regarding editorial policy, peer review, publication ethics, corrections, retractions, appeals, conflicts of interest, or publication standards.

IRJAR CORP.
Registered in Manitoba, Canada
Business Number: [IRJAR BUSINESS NUMBER]
Website: irjar.org
Email: support@irjar.org