Ethics and malpractise statement

Borealis has developed publication ethics policies for each of the Core Practices described by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics). In drawing up these policies, we have followed COPE’s guidelines for editors and publishers. Where suspected cases of malpractice are identified, we follow the flowcharts developed by COPE.

Authorship and contributorship

Borealis uses the definition of authorship set out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). An author (or co-author) of a manuscript should meet all four of the following criteria:

• Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND
• Final approval of the version to be published; AND
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Where contributors do not fully meet these criteria, their contribution should instead be credited in an acknowledgement.

Conflicts of interest

When submitting a manuscript to Borealis, authors are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interests that may prejudice or compromise their work, such as financial or commercial interests, personal or professional relationships, and political or religious beliefs. If the submission is accepted for publication, a conflict-of-interest statement will be added to the manuscript where applicable.

In line with COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, reviewers must declare all potential competing interests that might prevent them from providing a fair and unbiased review when they are approached by editors.

Data sharing

Borealis encourages authors to archive any research data underpinning their submission in a suitable open data repository.

Peer review ethics

Borealis adheres to the COPE ethical guidelines for peer reviewers. Reviewers, upon accepting the invitation to revise a paper for Borealis, must follow these guidelines.

Ethical oversight

Authors are expected to follow relevant institutional and international guidelines on research ethics. Depending on the severity of the oversight, the work could be retracted after publication.

Intellectual property

When submitting a manuscript to Borealis, authors must confirm that their work is original and has not been published or is currently under consideration for publication elsewhere. Authors of articles published in Borealis retain copyright to their work and grant permission to Septentrio Academic Publishing to distribute their work under a Creative Commons licence.

Post-publication discussions and corrections

Once an article has been published in Borealis, errors that significantly affect their content can be corrected. A correction notice including a list of changes, publication date of the original article and the date of the correction, and where to obtain the original article will be added to the corrected articles.

In rare circumstances, serious errors may invalidate an article’s results or conclusions. In such cases, we will follow COPE’s Retraction Guidelines and publish a retraction notice that states which parts of the article are erroneous, as well as the grounds for retraction.

Allegations of misconduct, complaints and appeals

Complaints to Borealis should be submitted by email to <antonio.fabregas@ntnu.no>, including allegations of misconduct. Complainants should describe the subject and nature of their complaint and provide supporting documentation. The Editors will, in consultation with the Editorial Board if necessary, assess any complaint on its merits, take any necessary remedial action, and respond to the complainant.