Editorial Policies

A. Peer Review Process

Each manuscript submitted to North South Business Review (NSBR) is initially screened by the editorial team to assess its relevance, originality, and alignment with the journal's scope. If judged suitable, manuscripts are then reviewed through a double blind peer review process by at least two independent referees. The journal maintains strict confidentiality throughout the review process and does not disclose the identities of either authors or reviewers.

Only original, unpublished manuscripts that are not under consideration elsewhere will be considered for publication in NSBR. The editorial decision to accept, revise, or reject a paper is based on the reviewers' recommendations and the editor's judgment. NSBR strictly adheres to the ethical peer review practices outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and all manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the review process.

B. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

North South Business Review (NSBR) is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity and publication ethics. All submissions to NSBR must comply with established ethical principles as outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and other relevant guidelines.

Our key ethical principles include:

1. Authorship

   Only individuals who make substantial contributions to the research are credited as authors. Ghost, guest, or gift authorship is not permitted.

2. Conflicts of Interest

   Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any financial or personal interests that may influence their work.

3. Intellectual Property

   Authors retain intellectual ownership of their ideas while granting copyright to NSBR. All content must be original and properly attributed.

4. Data Integrity

   Data must be accurate, transparent, and reproducible. Misrepresentation or fabrication of data will result in rejection or retraction.

5. Human Research Ethics

   Research involving human participants must have IRB or ethics committee approval and informed consent.

6. Plagiarism and Misconduct

   Any form of plagiarism, falsification, or research misconduct is strictly prohibited and will be addressed according to COPE procedures.

7. Complaints and Appeals

   Authors and reviewers have the right to appeal decisions or raise ethical concerns through a formal, fair process.

8. Corrections and Retractions

   NSBR follows COPE guidelines to issue corrections, retractions, expressions of concern, or article removals when necessary to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

For full details, please read our complete: https://www.northsouth.edu/nsbr/publication-ethics-and-malpractice-statement.html

C. Publishing Duties

1. Duties of the Editor-in-Chief

   The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the finalization of the manuscript of the issue with the papers to be published.

2. Duties of the Managing Editor

   The Managing Editor is authorized to decide which of the papers submitted to the journal will be accepted for publication. The Managing Editor is also responsible to select and assign the reviewers for reviewing of the submitted papers.

2.1 Publication Decision

The Managing Editor will finalize the decision of accepting, rejecting, and/or revising manuscripts without considering the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism is considered.

2.2 Selection of Reviewers

All research articles are subjected to thorough peer review by at least two peer reviewers. The Managing Editor will invite independent reviewers to review the submitted papers. The reviewers are traditionally invited by the editor from scholars having an international reputation and expertise in their respective fields.

2.3 Fair Evaluation

The decision will be based entirely on the paper's merit and the scope of the issue of the journal.

2.4 Confidentiality

The Managing Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information of any submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.5 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Unpublished materials of a manuscript submitted in this journal will not be used by the editorial members for their own research without the author's explicit written consent.

3. Duties of Reviewer(s)

3.1 Confidentiality

The reviewers must keep the materials of the manuscript confidential while reviewing the paper.

3.2 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

The reviewers should not disclose any information about any submitted manuscript to anyone other than the Managing Editor. Any article sent to the reviewer for review will not be used by the editorial members for their own research without the author's explicit written consent. The reviewers will promptly notify the editor if there is any conflict of interest about the article, topic, research agenda, and/or any issues of the assigned article.

3.3 Fair Evaluation

The reviewers will not attempt to communicate with the authors of the manuscript directly about the reviewed article while evaluating the same article.