Ethical Standards for Authors

The Archives of Psychiatry and Mental Health (APMH) is committed to maintaining the highest ethical standards in scholarly publishing. Authors submitting manuscripts are expected to uphold integrity, transparency, and accountability throughout the research and publication process. This page outlines the ethical requirements that all authors must follow to ensure the reliability, credibility, and scientific value of published work.

These standards align with guidelines established by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors), WAME (World Association of Medical Editors), and global best practices for biomedical publishing.

Ethical compliance is mandatory. Violations may result in rejection, retraction, institutional notification, or permanent submission bans.

1. Research Integrity and Originality

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts:

  • Present original research or analysis
  • Are free from plagiarism and redundant publication
  • Do not contain fabricated, falsified, or manipulated data
  • Have not been submitted simultaneously to another journal
  • Properly cite all sources, data, figures, and ideas

APMH screens all submissions using plagiarism-detection tools. Content overlap beyond accepted thresholds requires explanation or may result in rejection.

2. Authorship Responsibilities

Authorship must reflect meaningful contributions to:

  • Study design or conceptualization
  • Data acquisition, analysis, or interpretation
  • Drafting or revising the manuscript
  • Final approval of the version submitted

Individuals who do not meet these criteria should not be listed as authors, although they may be acknowledged.

Corresponding Author Accountability

The corresponding author is responsible for:

  • Ensuring all authors meet authorship criteria
  • Managing communications with the journal
  • Coordinating responses to reviewer feedback
  • Ensuring ethical transparency in the manuscript

3. Ethical Approval for Research

For studies involving human participants, animals, or sensitive data, authors must include:

  • Institutional review board (IRB) approval
  • Approval number and committee details
  • Informed consent statements

Case reports must include written patient consent for publication, including the use of images or identifiable information.

4. Data Transparency and Availability

Authors must accurately report methods and data to enable reproducibility. This includes:

  • Providing raw data when requested
  • Depositing datasets in recognized repositories
  • Disclosing all analytical methods and software used
  • Clarifying any data restrictions or limitations

Selective reporting or concealment of data is considered misconduct.

5. Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

Authors may use AI tools for grammar correction or language enhancement but must:

  • Not list AI tools as authors
  • Fully disclose AI usage in the manuscript
  • Ensure AI does not generate data, references, or images

Authors are fully responsible for verifying the accuracy and originality of all content.

AI-generated text, images, or references without disclosure constitute ethical misconduct.

6. Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

All authors must disclose:

  • Financial relationships
  • Personal or professional affiliations
  • Competing scientific or ideological positions
  • Funding sources

If no conflicts exist, authors must state: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”

7. Funding Transparency

Authors must disclose all funding sources that supported the research, including:

  • Granting agencies
  • Institutional support
  • Industry sponsorship
  • Private organizations

Any involvement of funders in study design, analysis, interpretation, or publication decisions must be clearly stated.

8. Accurate Reporting and Avoidance of Misrepresentation

Authors must:

  • Report findings honestly and transparently
  • Explain limitations of the study
  • Avoid overstating significance
  • Avoid selective reporting of favorable results

Misleading claims, concealment of conflicting data, or exaggeration of outcomes are considered unethical.

9. Duplicate and Redundant Publication

Authors must avoid:

  • Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously
  • Publishing substantially similar work in multiple venues
  • Self-plagiarism without proper citation

Redundant publication undermines scientific integrity and may result in rejection or sanctions.

10. Image Integrity and Manipulation

All images must reflect actual data. Acceptable modifications include:

  • Uniform brightness adjustment
  • Standard contrast normalization

Unacceptable modifications include:

  • Selective alteration of data points
  • Cloning or removing image elements
  • Fabricating visual data
  • Using AI to modify or generate images without disclosure

11. Responsibilities During Peer Review

Authors must:

  • Respond respectfully to reviewer comments
  • Provide clear, point-by-point revisions
  • Submit all files requested for re-evaluation
  • Refrain from contacting reviewers directly

Failure to engage professionally with reviewers may result in withdrawal.

12. Authorship Changes After Submission

Changes in authorship require:

  • A signed request from all authors
  • A valid explanation for the change
  • Editorial approval

Unethical authorship practices, including gift authorship or ghost authorship, will trigger investigation.

13. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Responsibilities

Authors must notify the journal immediately if they discover:

  • Errors in data or reporting
  • Misinterpretation or miscalculations
  • Missing citations
  • Ethical oversights

APMH may issue:

  • Corrections
  • Retractions
  • Expressions of concern
  • Updated versions

14. Ethical Use of Third-Party Materials

Authors must:

  • Obtain permission for copyrighted materials
  • Credit all reused figures, data, or tables
  • Provide source citations for adapted materials
  • Ensure no proprietary material is used unlawfully

15. Example Scenarios of Ethical and Unethical Conduct

Ethically Sound Scenario

A research group identifies an error in their statistical analysis after publication. They promptly contact the journal, submit corrected data, and a formal correction is issued. This demonstrates integrity and responsibility.

Unethical Scenario

An author reuses large sections of text from a previous publication without citation. Upon investigation, significant plagiarism is confirmed, resulting in rejection and institutional reporting.

Conclusion

Ethical conduct is a cornerstone of credible scientific publishing. The Archives of Psychiatry and Mental Health (APMH) expects all authors to uphold these standards throughout their research, writing, and publication processes. Adherence ensures integrity, transparency, and trust—values essential for advancing psychiatric research and global mental health scholarship.

© 2025 Archives of Psychiatry and Mental Health (APMH). All rights reserved.

Sources: Old Ethics Guidelines