Statement of Publication Ethics
Duties of the Editors-in-Chief/Editor/Asso.Editor
Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editor's own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
The Editor of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The Editor is guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board and constrained by legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making decisions related to these topics.
Duties of peer reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review assists the Editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript. Peer reviewers are not given any information related to the author and manuscripts are given with false number.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research presented in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the Editor so that alternative reviewers can be organized.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in- Chief. Manuscripts are given for review with false number.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.
Duties of authors
Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If authors have used the work and/or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication. An author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work Authorship of a manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co- authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co- authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Fundamental errors in published works When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s Editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the Editors-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.
The Publisher and the Journal do not discriminate on the basis of age, race, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier status, or sexual orientation in its publishing programs.
Submission of manuscripts
1. ishal paithrkam is a journal of Social Studies and humanities published by mahakavi mappila kala academy kondotty. It is an institution under the cultural affairs government of Kerala. accepts original texts which may contribute to advancing multi, inter and trans disciplinary research on national and international social reality, to promoting reflection and discussion on research instruments and methods, and to disseminating information and knowledge within the social sciences and the humanities.
2. ishal paithrkam publishes issues edited by the Executive Editorial Board (non-thematic issues), who is responsible for preparing thematic issues in collaboration with the Executive Editorial Board. Although individual authors may be invited to submit manuscripts, all the texts must follow the guidelines contained in this document, and will be evaluated as described below.
3. The manuscripts submitted to ishal paithrkam must be unpublished and authored by the person(s) submitting them. The manuscripts must clearly identify the source of every item that is not original (e.g. text excerpts, illustrations, tables, etc.), and make explicit reference, whenever necessary, to permissions obtained from copyright holders and/or authors. In the latter case, if the manuscripts include items protected by intellectual property rights, authors are responsible for obtaining permission from copyright holders.
4. Submission of a paper to ishal paithrkam is a certification by the author(s) that the manuscript has not been otherwise published. Although the ishal paithrkam editorial policy is to publish original manuscripts, the Executive Editorial Board may decide in exceptional cases to publish a previously published text, based on criteria of scholarly and intellectual relevance and opportuneness. In that case, the manuscript will only be published with an authorization from the owner(s) of the intellectual property rights.
5. Manuscripts may be submitted in English, or Malayalam and will be published in one of these two languages. Writing quality and clarity are essential requirements for publication.
6. All Authors' full name must be provided at just below the heading. And also provided all authors' complete address with name, zip code, state/province, and country, mobile number, email id at the end of article. The authors who submit their articles in Malayalam, they should also add title, author's name, author address with phone number and email id, key words, abstract (minimum 160 words) and Reference in English too. all correspondence to email: email@example.com
7. the authors who submit their manuscripts in English should follow MS Word and those who submit their manuscripts in Malayalam should follow pure typed PageMaker format with ML-Revathi font. Not use a converted format of PageMaker file.
There is no processing charges
Single Copy Chagres
Each copy is charged Indian rupees 300 and 50 rupees for postal expenses with in India. Postal expense outside India will be charge as per the rules of Indian Postal Department.
Subscription charge is 1200/year and rupees 200 for postal charge for 4 issues.
Statement of Peer Review Policies
Peer review guidelines
This journal follows a double-blind peer review model. In line with the aims and mission of the journal, papers are normally peer reviewed by two independent academic experts, and additional or supplementary reviews by experts from the policy community may be sought to ensure high-quality, impactful publications that are both academically rigorous and policy relevant.
Reviewers are expected to observe the Ethics Policy of ishal paithrkam, including the documents referenced in it, and are encouraged to read and observe the ishal paithrkam ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Those who oversee the peer review process are expected to recognize warning signs of misconduct and to report any concerns to the editorial office.
The criteria against which manuscripts are assessed include (i) fit with the aims and scope of the journal; (ii) adherence to generally accepted academic standards in terms of originality, significance and rigour, as well as to the criteria of high-quality research and analysis set out in Kerala Government publication policies, and specifically Mappila Kala Academy's Publication Policy; and (iii) policy relevance and potential to contribute to policy debates and evidence-based policymaking.
Manuscripts are initially screened by the Managing Editor for completeness and adherence to the formal aspects of the Guidelines for Contributors. Manuscripts may be returned to authors to remedy issues before progression to the Editors’ desk.
The Editor-in-Chief and/or Deputy Editors assess submissions and decide whether they are suitable for progression to the next stage of the review process on the basis of fit to the scope of journal, publishing standards of the journal and interest for the policy community.
Papers that pass the Editors’ desk will be assigned an Associate Editor with the requisite subject area expertise (depending on the particular subject area of the manuscript, this role may also be assumed by one of the Editors). The Associate Editor assesses the manuscript and decides if it warrants progression to the peer review stage and if so, selects reviewers and oversees the subsequent review process.
Papers that pass the Associate Editor stage will be reviewed typically by two peer reviewers who are experts in the field(s), with the selection of peer reviewers also taking into account the research methods and geographical focus of the paper. Supplementary reviews or policy guidance may be sought from relevant experts of the policy community (facilitated by the Editors).
Based on the reviewer reports, Associate Editors will recommend to the Editors a decision on the manuscript. The final decision rests with the Editors.
Editors are excluded from publication decisions when they are authors or have contributed to a manuscript. In such cases the review process and publication decision will be overseen by an alternate Editor.
The review process for ishal paithrkam Insights articles adheres to the same rigour as for externally submitted papers, but it is adjusted to reflect the nature of ishal paithrkam Insights (see Editorial Statement). The review is overseen by the Editors. Articles are typically assessed in the first instance by a member of the editorial team and then peer reviewed by experts with requisite subject and technical expertise drawn from ishal paithrkam, other international organizations and academia.
Communications with authors
At each stage of the review process, authors will be provided reasoned and constructive feedback about the decisions on their manuscript.
Conflicts of interest
Assigned Associate Editors and reviewers should inform the Editors of any potential conflicts with the assigned manuscript, for instance, resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions. In such instances they should inform the editors and recuse themselves from the review process.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. The confidentiality of participants in the review process is protected.
Appeals against editorial decisions require a formal appeal letter with point-by-point evidence supporting the appeal. In line with generally accepted standards, appeals are considered only on the basis of (i) reviewers’ potential technical errors in their assessment of the manuscript, (ii) new information or data that has come to light since submission of manuscript and (iii) evidence as to potential conflicts of interest of reviewers. Appeals against an editorial decision must be submitted within 14 days of the decision notice.
One appeal per manuscript is allowed. The Editor-in-Chief will consult the editorial team and where appropriate seek further advice from members of the Editorial Advisory Board. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.
Appeal letters should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief and should be submitted to the editorial office (firstname.lastname@example.org).