Digital Accounting and Auditing Journal (DAAJ) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, academic integrity, transparency, and responsibility in scholarly publishing.
Digital Accounting and Auditing Journal (DAAJ) is a peer-reviewed journal. This publication ethics statement clarifies the ethical responsibilities of all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, editors, editorial board members, reviewers, and publishers.
This statement is based on the principles and best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It reflects the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them.
Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. Therefore, it is important to establish standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing, including authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and scholarly communities.
DAAJ takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and recognizes its ethical responsibilities. Editorial decisions must not be influenced by advertising, commercial revenue, institutional interests, or other inappropriate considerations.
Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, citation manipulation, authorship manipulation, or other unethical practices in producing, performing, reviewing, or reporting research.
When allegations of misconduct arise, editors and the editorial board will follow COPE best practices to investigate and resolve the case fairly.
The editor is responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published. Decisions are based on the validity, originality, relevance, contribution, and importance of the manuscript to researchers and readers.
Editors may be guided by journal policies, reviewer recommendations, editorial board considerations, and applicable legal requirements related to copyright, plagiarism, defamation, and research ethics.
DAAJ provides a procedure for handling complaints against the journal, editorial staff, editorial board, reviewers, or publisher.
Complaints may include issues related to editorial processes, reviewer conduct, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, unfair editorial decisions, or other publication concerns.
All complaints will be processed according to COPE guidelines. Authors, readers, or stakeholders may submit complaints to the editorial office through the official journal contact email.
Editors evaluate manuscripts based on intellectual and scientific content without discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, institutional affiliation, or political philosophy of the authors.
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher when appropriate.
Manuscripts under review must be treated as confidential documents.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s, reviewer’s, or editorial staff member’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Editors, reviewers, and authors must disclose any conflicts of interest that may influence the review, decision, or interpretation of the manuscript.
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and helps authors improve the quality of their manuscripts.
Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript or are unable to complete the review promptly should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. They should also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript and other published works.
Privileged information obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest.
Authors must present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior.
Authors may be asked to provide raw data for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data where practicable. Authors are responsible for the reproducibility of their data and findings.
Authors must ensure that they have written original works. When the work or words of others are used, they must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Concurrent submission to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have significantly influenced the reported work.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, analysis, or interpretation of the study.
The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included, all co-authors have approved the final version of the manuscript, and all have agreed to its submission.
Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support must be disclosed.
When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they are obliged to promptly notify the editor or publisher and cooperate in correcting or retracting the article.
Referring to statements issued by COPE and similar scholarly publication organizations, DAAJ does not recognize Artificial Intelligence tools, including ChatGPT or other Large Language Models, as authors of scholarly articles.
AI tools cannot meet authorship criteria because they cannot take responsibility for submitted work, declare conflicts of interest, or manage copyright and licensing agreements.
Authors are fully responsible for the authenticity, originality, validity, and ethical integrity of their manuscripts. They are accountable for any ethical breaches or misconduct arising from their submissions.
If the research involves humans, animals, hazardous materials, confidential data, sensitive information, business data, or organizational practices, authors must clearly identify and justify the ethical aspects of the study.
Where required, authors must provide ethical clearance, institutional approval, research permits, or other relevant documentation.
Authors must ensure that confidential data are protected and that all research procedures comply with applicable ethical and legal standards.
Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts do not infringe copyright, intellectual property rights, privacy rights, or other rights of third parties.
The journal’s copyright policy is stated in the Copyright Notice section of DAAJ. Authors are responsible for understanding and complying with the journal’s copyright and licensing requirements.
DAAJ applies a peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and scientific contribution of submitted manuscripts.
Manuscripts that pass the editorial screening stage will be reviewed by reviewers with relevant expertise. Reviewers provide recommendations to support editorial decisions.
The final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection is made by the editor based on reviewer comments, editorial assessment, and journal policies.
DAAJ accepts scholarly discussions and corrections related to published articles. Readers may contact the editorial office to submit comments, corrections, or concerns regarding published works.
If accepted by the editor, discussions or corrections may be published in a subsequent issue as a letter to the editor, correction notice, or editorial note.
Authors may respond to scholarly discussions or corrections, and the response may also be published when appropriate.
