Editorial and Publication Procedures

The editorial and publication procedures of the Journal of Practice Theory are informed by the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Our aim is to prioritise transparency, ethical oversight, and integrity throughout the editorial process. This document outlines the key aspects of our editorial and publication procedures to ensure that all authors and contributors understand and adhere to these standards.

Before submitting your manuscript, please review this document—alongside the Author Guidelines, Statement on Publication Ethics, and Peer Review Process and Policy—with your co-authors to ensure agreement with the applicable requirements and the journal’s way of working.

Authorship and Contribution

Overview

The Journal of Practice Theory’s statement on authorship and contribution is based on the COPE discussion document on Authorship and on definitions set out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Authorship is a critical aspect of academic publishing, conferring both credit and responsibility.

Publications are a major metric by which academics are evaluated and are essential for hiring, promotion, and grant funding. Authorship has important academic, social, and financial implications.

The following recommendations are intended to ensure that contributors who have made substantive intellectual contributions to a paper are credited as authors and that those credited as authors understand their role in taking responsibility and being accountable for what is published.

Criteria for Authorship

Authorship should be based on the following four criteria:

1. Substantial Contributions: Significant involvement in the conception, design, data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of the work;
2. Drafting and Reviewing: Participation in drafting the work or revising it;
3. Final Approval: Approval of the final version to be published;
4. Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work and ensuring its accuracy and integrity.

All authors must meet all four criteria. It is the collective responsibility of the authors to determine appropriate authorship and order.

Corresponding Author Responsibilities

The corresponding author assumes primary responsibility for communication with the journal during the submission, peer-review, and publication processes. The corresponding author must ensure that all administrative requirements are met, including reporting complete details of authorship, any ethics committee approval, and disclosures of conflicting relationships. The corresponding author should also be available post-publication to address any queries.

Contributorship, Acknowledgements, and Disputes

Contributors who do not meet all criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately. Examples of activities that alone (without other contributions) do not qualify a contributor for authorship include the acquisition of funding, general supervision of a research group, general administrative support, and writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, and proofreading.

Acknowledgements may denote contributions to the work that do not meet the criteria for authorship, such as supporting the study, general mentoring, collecting data, acting as study coordinator, and other related activities.

Disputes regarding authorship should be resolved among the contributing authors or referred to their respective institutions. The journal will not arbitrate authorship conflicts. If authors request the removal or addition of an author after manuscript submission or publication, journal editors should seek an explanation and signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all listed authors and from the author to be removed or added. In extreme cases, the editor will update the journal record through an erratum, corrigendum, or an editorial expression of concern or retraction.

Use of AI in Authorship

AI and AI-assisted technologies cannot be listed as authors in the Journal of Practice Theory because they cannot be responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the work. Any content directly produced with the use of AI should be disclosed in the acknowledgment section. The human authors are responsible for ensuring the integrity of the work, including any content generated with AI assistance.

Ethical Oversight

Manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Practice Theory must adhere to the ethical guidelines set out in the journal’s Statement on Publication Ethics, particularly when research involves human or animal subjects. Authors must ensure compliance with any legal requirements and institutional review boards. Any potential ethical concerns should be disclosed during submission.

Data Sharing

The Journal of Practice Theory supports the principle of transparency that the data that inform research should be open, shared, and, where appropriate, made available to other researchers. Authors are therefore expected to maintain accurate records of supporting evidence, provide access to these materials upon reasonable request, and detail where those materials are available or how to request access during submission so that this information can be published with the contribution. (See Guidelines for Authors).

Supporting materials are not reviewed as part of the review process unless concerns are raised by reviewers.

Conflicts of Interest/Competing Interests

Authors, reviewers, and editors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence the research, review, or editorial processes. This disclosure should be made upon submission or to the editor and should include any financial, personal, or professional relationships.

Post-Publication Discussion

The Journal of Practice Theory encourages interaction and discussion of published work and aims to facilitate academic debate and the exchange of ideas beyond the initial publication. The main ways that authors and readers may engage in discussion are through contributions to the journal, either by submitting a response-type article, proposing a ‘Dialogue and Debate’ topic, or writing a letter to the editor (which can be published as a column/editorial).

Queries about the Integrity of Published Research / Allegations of Research Misconduct

Reporting Concerns

The Journal of Practice Theory is committed to upholding the integrity of the research it publishes. Allegations of misconduct, including plagiarism, data fabrication, and other ethical breaches, should be reported directly to the journal via our email address. Evidence should be provided to support any claims.

Investigation Process

The editor will investigate all credible allegations in line with the guidelines described in COPE’s discussion document on Dealing with Concerns about the Integrity of Published Research. In the event that any article requires a misconduct review, specific investigative measures will take place. Such measures will include, but are not limited to, communicating with authors, editorial assessment, and, where applicable, liaison with relevant institutions and research bodies.

During the investigation, review and publication processes may be halted until the issue is resolved. The complainant's anonymity will be respected unless permission is granted to disclose their identity. The journal aims to provide an initial response to complainants (i.e., whether their complaint or concern will result in a misconduct review) within one month of receipt.

Outcomes

If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate measures will be taken, such as issuing corrections or expressions of concern. In severe cases, articles may be retracted.

Corrections and Retractions

Corrections

Corrections (errata or corrigenda) will be issued when errors are identified that do not affect the overall findings of the research but require clarification. If an author’s submission is judged to contain an error, the journal will issue a corrigendum. Conversely, if the journal is found to have made an error, we will issue an erratum.

Retractions

Retractions are considered in cases where the research is fundamentally flawed, where there is evidence of substantial misconduct, or where life-endangering content has been published. Retractions will be clearly indicated, and the reasons will be thoroughly documented.

Complaints and Appeals Against the Journal, Its Staff, or Editorial Board

Complaints or appeals concerning the conduct of the journal, its staff, or editorial board members should be submitted in writing to the editor. All complaints will be treated with transparency and fairness and in broad accordance with the COPE principles and guidelines on complaints and appeals.

Complaints against the editor can be raised with the academic institution of the editor or with a co-editor.

References and Resources

For further information on publication ethics, please refer to the COPE guidelines and the relevant links provided throughout this document. For specific queries, to report ethical concerns, or to make a complaint, please contact the journal - jpt@lancaster.ac.uk