Publication Ethics and Research Integrity

Open Christian Press regards truthfulness as both a scholarly obligation and a moral responsibility. Publication integrity requires accurate representation of evidence, transparent authorship, lawful and ethical research practices, fair acknowledgement of intellectual debts and willingness to correct the record when material errors are established.

Our procedures are informed by recognised scholarly publishing guidance, including the core concerns addressed by the Committee on Publication Ethics, without implying that every allegation can be resolved by the publisher alone.

Responsibilities of authors

Authors must submit work that is original, accurate and not simultaneously under consideration elsewhere. They must disclose relevant funding, institutional interests, personal relationships, prior dissemination, closely related manuscripts and material use of automated tools.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy of data, quotations, references, images, interpretations and declarations, including material prepared with assistance from students, contractors, translators or AI systems.

Authorship and acknowledgement

Authorship should reflect substantial intellectual contribution and accountability. Gift, honorary, coercive and purchased authorship are unacceptable. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their permission.

The corresponding author must ensure that all authors approve the submission and publication, understand the author agreement and consent to the recorded order and affiliations.

Originality, plagiarism and text recycling

The Press may use similarity-checking tools and editorial assessment to identify copied, inadequately attributed or substantially recycled material. A similarity percentage is not a verdict. Editors consider the nature, source, extent, context and attribution of overlap.

Plagiarism includes presenting another person's language, ideas, data, images, structure or creative work as one's own. Fabricated citations, disguised copying, translation plagiarism and appropriation of unpublished material are also unacceptable.

Limited reuse of standard methodological wording or an author's prior description may be permissible when transparent and proportionate. Substantial republication requires disclosure, citation and any necessary permission.

Duplicate and fragmented publication

Authors should not divide one coherent study into multiple minimally distinct papers merely to increase publication counts. Closely related manuscripts must be disclosed. Secondary publication or translation may be considered where lawful, clearly identified, approved by relevant rights holders and justified for a different audience.

Research involving people, data or animals

Authors must comply with applicable institutional, national and disciplinary ethical standards. Required approval, exemption, consent and safeguarding procedures should be stated. Research involving vulnerable populations, sensitive personal data, deception, covert observation or significant risk requires particular care.

The Press may request ethics documentation and may consult an institution where serious concerns arise. Publisher review does not replace the responsibility of research institutions or competent authorities.

Data, images and analytical integrity

Fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, selective omission and misleading statistical presentation are unacceptable. Adjustments made for clarity must not alter the substantive meaning of the evidence and should be disclosed where relevant.

Authors should retain underlying records for an appropriate period and make data or materials available when ethically, legally and practically possible.

Citation integrity

Citations should support the claims for which they are used. Authors must not cite sources they have not meaningfully consulted, invent references, manipulate citations to benefit particular individuals or journals, or use citation volume as a substitute for argument.

Editors and reviewers must not pressure authors to add irrelevant citations. Legitimate suggestions should explain the scholarly reason for inclusion.

Conflicts of interest

Authors, reviewers and editors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, ideological, theological or personal interests that could reasonably influence judgement. A conflict does not always prevent participation, but it must be managed transparently.

Editors should recuse themselves where independence cannot reasonably be maintained.

Editorial and reviewer conduct

Editors and reviewers must preserve confidentiality, avoid appropriation, provide fair and constructive assessments, disclose conflicts and refrain from discriminatory, abusive or retaliatory conduct. Review should address the work rather than the dignity or motives of the author.

Allegations and investigations

Concerns should be supported by specific information and submitted respectfully. The Press will conduct a preliminary assessment, preserve relevant records, avoid premature public accusation and seek a response from affected parties where appropriate.

Serious research misconduct may require referral to an author's institution, funder, ethics body or other competent authority. The Press does not possess the investigative powers of a university or regulator, but it remains responsible for proportionate action concerning the publication record.

Possible outcomes

Depending on evidence and stage, outcomes may include no action, clarification, manuscript revision, rejection, publication delay, correction, expression of concern, retraction, withdrawal, notification of an institution, or restriction of future submissions in cases of serious or repeated abuse.

Sanctions should be proportionate, documented and separated from personal disagreement or viewpoint discrimination.

Fairness and presumption

Allegations are not proof. The Press seeks to protect whistleblowers acting in good faith while also protecting authors, reviewers and editors from reckless, malicious or unsupported accusations. Decisions should distinguish honest error, contested interpretation, negligence and deliberate deception.

Biblical and scholarly integrity

Faith-informed scholarship is not exempt from ordinary evidentiary standards. Invoking Scripture, conscience or spiritual conviction does not justify misquotation, false witness, manipulated evidence or refusal to correct a demonstrated error. Conversely, controversial conclusions should not be rejected merely because they challenge dominant assumptions. Claims should be assessed according to evidence, reasoning, method, relevance and ethical responsibility.