Editors can reject a submission for copyright violations, plagiarism, missing pre-publication requirements, etc. The staff collaborates to analyse all papers to maintain the journal’s quality. The editors examine papers based on academic excellence and relevance to the journal, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. The decision of the editor in chief is considered to be conclusive and binding on all parties involved. All discussions about manuscripts (with authors and reviewers) are handled by editors, who can be contacted with questions.
According to the guidelines and policies of the journal, the editors will not reveal or distribute any information, including the contents of the manuscript, to anyone other than the Corresponding Author, a possible reviewer of the manuscript, reviewers of the manuscripts, or any other person from the organisation working on the manuscript. This is in accordance with the rules and policies of the journal.
Editors have a responsibility to reveal any potential conflicts of interest in connection with the manuscripts they are currently working on, regardless of whether the potential conflict is of a personal, professional, or research nature. In the event that such a conflict arises, they will hand off the manuscript to other Editors so that it can be processed further. Editors won’t exploit unpublished manuscript data for personal research or advantage.
The editors have the responsibility of sending all of the submitted articles (that have passed the plagiarism test) to at least two reviewers (who are experts in the field), and they will continue working based on the review reports. The Editor-in-chief decides whether to publish an article based on reviewers’ comments, the manuscript’s value to scholars and readers, and legal requirements including libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. In order to make this judgement, the Editor-in-Chief could discuss it with the other editors or reviewers.
For Reviewers
The Editor-in-chief is responsible for making all editorial decisions regarding publishing, and such decisions are made based on the comments provided by reviewers. The reviewer’s report and any comments they offer help the authors make their papers better while also assisting the editors in making an informed judgement.
After the manuscript has been received, reviewers are extended an invitation to read it. If the reviewer feels unqualified for the manuscript review on the topic or cannot give the review report within a reasonable period, he/she must contact the editors promptly and decline the invitation so that other reviewers can be appointed and the review process can be finished on time.
Any manuscripts received for evaluation are confidential and must be kept as such; they must not be shown or discussed with anyone unless permitted by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). Anyone who is extended an offer to review but then declines that request is included in this category.
It is the obligation of the reviewers to evaluate the articles in a manner that is independent of their personal opinions, that is, objectively. The journal utilises a blind peer review method in order to ensure that the review is both transparent and devoid of any kind of bias.
Reviewers need to look for other published works that are comparable to the ones the authors have specified. A reference needs to be included after every assertion that consists of a previously published observation, derivation, or argument. The reviewer is obligated to alert the editors of any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript being considered and any other manuscripts that are in their possession. (whether it be published or not published) of which they have personal knowledge.
Reviewers must disclose any personal, professional, or research-related conflicts of interest while evaluating a paper. In the event that such a dispute arises, they will notify the Editors in order to proceed with further procedure and decline for review. Reviewers won’t utilise unpublished manuscript data for research or personal advantage.
For Authors and Authors Responsibilities:
Abstracts in the appropriate format are required to be included with each paper. The abstract ought to be self-explanatory, condensed, and informative in its overall character. It is possible to offer it independently or incorporate it into the actual manuscript. The findings, comments, and overall conclusions need to be presented in a lucid manner, with appropriate evidence to back up the facts. In the Results and Analysis section, you should emphasise how well the stated objectives were met, as described in the introduction. It is necessary to include every result that may be attributed to the procedures. Results should be summarised as clearly and simply as is practicable using either the body of the text, the table(s), or the figure (s). Discussion should begin with basic background information, then move on to the study’s results, limitations, and future research directions. Unacceptable and unethical behaviour includes making false or erroneous claims with full knowledge of the facts.
LIJDLR will not tolerate any sort of plagiarism, under any circumstances. Every single piece of writing that turns out to have plagiarised material will be automatically considered for rejection. The use of citations and references does not guarantee that plagiarism will be reduced. When submitting a manuscript, authors are required to attest that it was authored by them alone and that it does not contain any instances of plagiarism. If it is discovered that there was plagiarism after the article was published, the Editor-in-chief, along with a committee of two other editors, will conduct an inquiry, and the manuscript will be withdrawn. If any other copyright claim or plagiarism is uncovered after publishing, LIJDLR will let the author respond. If the allegations of plagiarism or infringement of copyright are found to be accurate, LIJDLR shall be obligated to remove the work from the website immediately. It is unacceptable to engage in any type of unethical publication behaviour, which includes plagiarism, which can take many different forms.
The research presented in the manuscript must not have been previously published or be presently being reviewed at any other journal, conference, book, etc., and the manuscript should not be submitted to any other journal or conference while it is in the process of being reviewed by us. It is unacceptable to engage in unethical publishing behaviour such as submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time.
Nevertheless, there are situations in which it is permissible to publish more than once, taking into consideration how essential it is. Exceptions might be made in these situations (for example it is in different language to cater the needs of specific audience). Before making any such publication, the Authors are required to get approval from the Editorial Board. The practise of making multiple, duplicate, redundant, or contemporaneous submissions or publications is not only unethical but also unacceptable.
Authors’ names, affiliations, and email ids must be on all publications. Only those who match these authorship standards should be labelled as writers since they can assume public accountability for the content:
(i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and
(ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and
(iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.
The following types of assistance may be briefly acknowledged in acknowledgements:
1) contributions who do not justify authorship;
2) technical help; and
3) material support.
Including a person’s name in the part labelled “Acknowledgements” requires first obtaining the concerned person’s written consent. The associated Author is responsible for providing an accurate list and checking to ensure that it is accurate before the submission.
It is the responsibility of the authors to disclose any potential conflicts of interest, and this obligation extends to the disclosure of any grants or funding that the authors may have received for the research. It is necessary to reveal any and all financial backing that the project received (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
Participation in the peer-review procedure that is outlined by the journal is required of authors in order for their work to be published. Upon submission, the manuscript is screened for instances of plagiarism; if it meets the requirements, it is then moved on to the next stage of the process, which is peer review. The Authors are obligated to offer any necessary explanations or any additional pertinent information that may be requested. The authors are obligated to provide a point-by-point response to any revisions that are suggested in a timely way, and they must resubmit the article within the allotted amount of time.
If the author discovers a serious error in one of their published works, they are obligated to immediately tell the editors of the error and submit a copy of the work with the fault repaired. If the Journal discovers a substantial error, it is the responsibility of the Authors to submit a revised version of their work. Infractions of professional ethical rules, including but not limited to numerous submissions, fake claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, and similar transgressions. Additionally, the Manuscript will be withdrawn as a result.
