The principles that govern decision-making and conduct across our journals.
These editorial policies complement our Publication Ethics and apply across all Directive Publications journals.
Editors have full authority over the content of their journals and make decisions based solely on scholarly merit, validity, and relevance — free from commercial or political influence. Acceptance is never contingent on payment of any charge.
Authorship should reflect genuine intellectual contribution. We encourage transparent contributorship statements and the use of ORCID. Changes to authorship after submission require the agreement of all authors and editorial approval.
Authors, reviewers, and editors must declare any financial or non-financial interests that could be perceived to influence the work. Declared interests are managed to preserve impartiality.
We encourage authors to share data and materials and to include a data availability statement, supporting reproducibility and reuse.
Generative AI tools must not be listed as authors. Any substantive use of AI in preparing a manuscript should be disclosed. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their work.
The published article is the version of record. Where correction is warranted, we issue corrigenda, errata, expressions of concern, or retractions in line with COPE; the original article is never silently altered or removed.
Complaints about editorial process or conduct, and appeals against decisions, should be directed to the editorial office and are handled fairly by someone not involved in the original decision.
Editorial content is kept strictly separate from any advertising or sponsorship, which never influences editorial decisions.
Authors are encouraged to make the data underlying their findings openly available wherever ethically and legally possible — through a recognised repository or as supplementary material — and to include a data-availability statement describing how the data can be accessed. Where data cannot be shared (for example, for privacy or consent reasons), this should be stated and justified.
Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may email the editorial office with a point-by-point response to the reviewers and editor. Appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final. Complaints about editorial process, ethics, or conduct are handled promptly and confidentially in line with COPE guidance; unresolved concerns may be escalated to the publisher.