Code of Ethics for Authors
When an Author submits a manuscript to Archives of Design Research(ADR), the manuscript must be an original work.
Authors must not submit the same work, in whole or in part, to two places of publication at the same time, or at any time while the manuscript is under review at ADR. It is also improper for an Author to submit a manuscript describing essentially the same research to more than one place of publication, unless it is a resubmission of a manuscript rejected for or withdrawn from publication. Thus, an Author may not submit to ADR a work that is in whole or in part under review elsewhere, nor submit to another publication outlet a work that is in whole or in part under review at ADR.
The manuscript must not have been previously published or accepted for publication elsewhere, either in whole (including book chapters) or in part (including paragraphs of text or exhibits), whether in English or another language.
The only exception to the “originality” rule is a conference proceedings paper, where the paper is work in progress toward the manuscript submitted to ADR. The Author must inform the ADR Office of the conference proceedings paper, either in advance of or at the time of submission to the Journal, and, if requested by the ADR Office, send the conference proceedings paper to the ADR Editor handling the manuscript.
If the manuscript contains materials that overlap with work that is previously published, that is in press, or that is under consideration for publication elsewhere, the Author must cite this work in the manuscript. The Author must also inform theADR Office of the related work and, if requested, send the manuscript to the Editor.
Authors must explicitly cite their own earlier work and ideas, even when the work or ideas are not quoted verbatim or paraphrased in the manuscript. If exact sentences or paragraphs that appear in another work by the Author are included in the manuscript, the material should be put in quotation marks and appropriately cited in a way that does not compromise the double-blind review process.
The manuscript should identify the origin, and originality, of any proprietary, non-standard datasets used in the paper, for example, a primary dataset created by the Author using a survey. If the proprietary dataset has been used elsewhere by this or another Author the manuscript should cite these other works, whether published or not.
While self-citation is encouraged, Authors should avoid excessively citing their earlier works in order to inflate their citation count. Authors should also avoid self-citation that might violate the double-blind review process. If self-identifying information is unavoidable, the Author should include the information in the manuscript's Acknowledgements (which are not forwarded to the Reviewers) and also inform the ADR Managing Editor.
Authors should not submit a manuscript to ADR that was previously submitted to ADR, sent out for review, and rejected after review by a ADR Editor. If an earlier version was previously rejected by ADR, and the Author wishes to submit a revised version for review, this fact and the justification for resubmission should be clearly communicated by the Author to the ADR Managing Editor at the time of submission. Only under rare circumstances will a second submission be permissible.
Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism:
All work in the manuscript should be free of any plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another's paper as the Author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper without attribution, to claiming results from research conducted by others. Authors are expected to explicitly cite others' work and ideas, even if the work or ideas are not quoted verbatim or paraphrased. This standard applies whether the previous work is published, unpublished, or electronically available. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Redundancy (or “self-plagiarism”) is unacceptable publishing behavior. Redundancy can occur in at least two ways: (1) Authors recycle portions of their previous writings by using identical or nearly identical sentences or paragraphs from earlier writings in subsequent research papers, without quotation or acknowledgement; or (2) Authors create multiple papers that are slight variations on each other, which are submitted for publication in different journals but without acknowledgement of the other papers. Authors can and often do develop different aspects of an argument in more than one manuscript. However, manuscripts that differ primarily in appearance, but are presented as separate and distinct research without acknowledging other related work, constitute attempts (whether unintentional or deliberate) to deceive reviewers and readers by overinflating the intellectual contribution of the manuscript. Since publication decisions are influenced by the novelty and innovativeness of manuscripts, such deception is inappropriate and unethical.
Authors should minimize their recycling of previous writings. If recycling is unavoidable, the Author should inform the Editor at the time of submission and reference the previous writings in the manuscript. Such self-referencing should be worded carefully so as to avoid compromising the double-blind review process.
If exact sentences or paragraphs that appear in another work by the Author are included in the manuscript, the material must be put in quotation marks and appropriately cited.
Cases of plagiarism and redundancy will be handled according to the practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (download PDF). In instances the Editor deems as “major” redundancy (e.g., multiple overlapping paragraphs), the paper will be rejected and authors may be barred from submitting to ADR for a period of time. In cases of “minor” redundancy (e.g., a single duplicate paragraph describing the research methods), the authors would be asked to rephrase the duplicate sentences.
ADR reserves the right to evaluate issues of plagiarism and redundancy on a case-by-case basis.
Conflicts of Interest:
Authors should avoid conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest throughout the research process. A conflict of interest is some fact known to a participant in the publication process that if revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived (or an Author, Reviewer, or Editor feel defensive). Conflicts of interest may influence the judgment of Authors, Reviewers, and Editors. Possible conflicts often are not immediately apparent to others. They may be personal, commercial, political, academic, or financial. Financial interests may include employment, research funding (received or pending), stock or share ownership, patents, payment for lectures or travel, consultancies, non-financial support, or any fiduciary interest in the company. The perception of a conflict of interest is nearly as important as an actual conflict, since both erode trust.
All such interests (or their absence) should be declared in writing by Authors upon submission of the manuscript. If any are declared, they should be published with the article. If there is doubt about whether a circumstance represents a conflict, it should be disclosed, so that Editors may assess its significance. Any queries about possible conflicts of interest should be addressed to the ADR Office or Editor-in-Chief.
Authors should disclose in the manuscript's Acknowledgements any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Authors may withhold the names of specific sponsors if they provide an adequate and full description of the sponsor's nature and interest.
When submitting a manuscript to ADR, the Corresponding Author has the opportunity to recommend one or more Area/Consulting Editors and up to four possible Reviewers for the manuscript. Authors should avoid any possible conflict of interest, or appearance of conflict of interest, in selecting Editors and Reviewers. Such conflicts of interest apply not only to the Corresponding Author but to any Co-Authors on the manuscript.
Examples of possible conflicts of interest include: (1) one of the Authors is at the same institution as the nominated Editor or Reviewer; (2) one of the Authors was a member of the Editor or Reviewer's dissertation committee, or vice versa; or (3) one of the Authors, and the Editor or Reviewer, are currently Co-Authors on another manuscript or have been Co-Authors on a manuscript within the past two years.
Authors should not nominate individuals whom they know have already read and provided comments on the manuscript or a previous version of the manuscript since such knowledge would automatically violate the double-blind review process.
ADR follows a double-blind review process, whereby Authors do not know Reviewers and vice versa. Authors should respect the confidentiality of the review process and should not reveal themselves to Reviewers, and vice versa. For example, the manuscript should not include any self-revealing information that would identify the Author to a Reviewer.
Authors should not post their submitted manuscript (including working papers and prior drafts) on websites where it could be easily discovered by potential Reviewers.
Authors should not nominate as Editor or Reviewer individuals whom they know have already read and provided comments on the manuscript or a previous version of the manuscript since such knowledge would automatically violate the double-blind review process.
Authors have the ultimate responsibility for all materials included in a manuscript submitted to ADR. Authors are obligated to present an accurate account of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research.
Authors should report their findings fully and should not omit data that are relevant within the context of the research question(s). Results should be reported whether they support or contradict expected outcomes. Authors should take particular care to present relevant qualifications to their research or to the findings and interpretations of them. Underlying assumptions, theories, methods, measures and research designs relevant to the findings and interpretations of their work should be disclosed.
The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit peers with access to the same dataset to repeat the work.
If an Author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own work, it is the Author's obligation to promptly notify the journal Editor and cooperate with the Editor to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the Author to promptly retract or correct the manuscript or provide evidence to the Editor of the correctness of the original paper.
All Co-Authors of papers should have made significant contributions to the work and share accountability for the results. Authorship and credit should be shared in proportion to the various parties' contributions. Authors should take responsibility and credit, including authorship credit, only for work they have actually performed or to which they have contributed. Other contributions should be cited in the manuscript's Acknowledgements or an endnote.
Authors should normally list a student as the principal Co-Author on multiple-authored publications that substantially derive from the student's dissertation or thesis.
Authors who analyze data from others should explicitly acknowledge the contribution of the initial researchers.
The Corresponding Author who submits a manuscript to ADR should have sent all living Co-Authors a draft and obtained their assent to submission and publication.
Authors have a responsibility to preserve and protect the privacy, dignity, well-being and freedom of human subjects and research participants. Informed consent should be sought from all human subjects, and if confidentiality or anonymity is requested it should be honored.
Manuscripts involving human subjects (surveys, simulations, interviews) should comply with the relevant Human Subject Protocol requirements at the Author's university.
Authors should check their manuscripts for possible breaches of copyright law (e.g., where permissions are needed for quotations, artwork or tables taken from other publications) and secure the necessary permissions before submission.
Authors should avoid anything in the text of the manuscript that might be actionable, such as defamation. Authors should avoid using sexist and biased language that could be interpreted as denigrating to ethnic or other groups; for example, plural rather than single pronouns ("they" rather than "he") are recommended.
Authors should be prompt with their manuscript revisions. If an Author cannot meet the deadline given, the Author should contact the ADR Managing Editor as soon as possible to determine whether a longer time period or withdrawal from the review process should be chosen.