The Philippine Sociological Review and its publisher, the Philippine Sociological Society, are committed to the publication practices and guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

  1. Fair play and editorial independence
    The Editorial Board assesses manuscripts exclusively based on academic merit and relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ personal background and institutional affiliation. The Editor, in consultation with Associate Editors, exercises full authority over the content of the journal. The Editorial Board maintains complete editorial control and independence from the publisher.
  2. Confidentiality
    The Editorial Board shall not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, (potential) reviewers, the International Advisory Board, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
    Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling submissions will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors may use unpublished information for research purposes provided that the authors’ explicit written consent is sought and a corresponding notice is furnished to the Editorial Board.
    Editors must inhibit from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors (in such cases, the manuscript will then be assigned to an Associate Editor).
  4. Publication Decisions
    The Editor must ensure that all manuscripts being considered for publication must undergo a double-blind peer-review by at least two external reviewers. An internal review is conducted primarily by an Associate Editor who either recommends the manuscript for external review or rejection.
    For manuscripts that are endorsed for double-blind review, Associate Editors may nominate potential reviewers; however, the Editor ultimately selects the reviewers for each manuscript. Upon the recommendation of an Associate Editor and based on the feedback of external reviewers, the Editor decides whether a manuscript is rejected, accepted for publication, or should undergo a revision.
  5. Ethical Issues
    Concerns regarding unethical conduct may be raised to the Editorial Board and/or the publisher by any entity in writing or through formal communication. The reporting party must include a complete account of the alleged misconduct in the correspondence, which forms the basis of the investigation.
    In consultation with the Editorial Board and/or the Philippine Sociological Society Board, it is the primary responsibility of the Editor to take swift and careful measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Any outcome of the investigation must first be reported to the Editorial Board and discussed with the publisher before it is released to the public.
    For serious cases of misconduct, the following redress may be explored:
    ⦁ Informing or educating the author/reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
    ⦁ Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct across print and electronic platforms for wider dissemination
    ⦁ A formal notice to the head of the author’s/reviewer’s department/institution/agency
    ⦁ Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal
    ⦁ Imposition of an embargo on contributions for a defined period


Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers/Referees

  1. Quality and Promptness of Assessments
    It is expected that invited reviewers must initially assess whether they are qualified to review the manuscript before accepting the Editor’s invitation. Referees must provide a comprehensive assessment of the manuscript within the designated period. A review should only contain an objective assessment of the manuscript in question and must not include any personal criticisms/attacks against the author. Reviewers should be informed by the Editor of the decision of any manuscript they assessed.
  2. Confidentiality
    Referees must maintain the confidentiality of any information regarding manuscripts and any correspondence with the Editorial Board. (The same rule also applies to invited reviewers.)
  3. Acknowledgement of sources
    Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any significant overlap between the content of the manuscript under review and other published or unpublished works must be reported to the Editor.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest
    An invited reviewer who reports any potential conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript must decline the invitation to review. Any referee who suspects the identity of the author should likewise recuse him/herself from reviewing the manuscript.
    Any information or data disclosed from the review process, including that of the manuscript under review, should not be used by the reviewer for his/her personal or professional interests.


Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

  1. Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgment of sources
    Authors must only submit original and unpublished works. Any submission that has been determined to be plagiarized will be accorded with a corresponding penalty. Plagiarism may include the “‘passing of’ another´s paper as the author´s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another´s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others” (Elsevier n.d.)
    It is the responsibility of the author that any publication that has been influential to the development of the submission must be reflected in the manuscript and properly attributed or cited.
  2. Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission
    Authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published or is currently being considered in another journal/publication outlet. Authors must inform the Editor whether any version of the manuscript has been previously disseminated widely to audiences prior to submission. The journal may consider only one manuscript by any author at any time.
  3. Authorship of the manuscript
    The journal adopts the recommendations proposed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (n.d.), specifying persons who merit authorship as those who:
    (a) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study;
    (b) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (c) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.
    The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the submitted version manuscript (1) has been reviewed and approved by all co-authors, (2) that the submission meets all the journal requirements/guidelines, and (3) that all authors are listed appropriately, the order of which has been agreed upon. The corresponding author must file any formal and written request in the change of authorship; only exceptional circumstances warrant any change in authorship.
  4. Disclosure and conflicts of interest
    Any conflict of interest that may have influenced the development of the manuscript or may affect the review process must be reported by the authors upon submission. Conflicts of interests include, but not limited to, those financial in nature such as “honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript” (Elsevier n.d.). It is the responsibility of the authors to inform any funding sources or financial support.
  5. Peer review
    Authors are required to cooperate with the journal’s peer-review process by responding promptly and completely to any request or clarification. An author who receives feedback regarding his/her submission must respond to the Editor’s request for revision and must be able to revise the manuscript according to all the reviewers’ comments within the indicated deadline. Authors are required to carefully review the page proof of their manuscript and respond to any copyediting queries.
  6. Errors in published works
    It is the sole responsibility of the authors to ensure the accuracy, correctness, and completeness of any and all information stated in the manuscript prior to its publication. Any errors or inaccuracies in the author’s published work must be immediately reported to the Editor for appropriate action. Changes to any published work, including retraction, must be announced by the Editor.

Committee on Publication Ethics. 1999. “Guidelines on Good Publication Practice.”
Committee on Publication Ethics. N.d. “Core Practices.”
Elsevier. N.d. “Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement.”
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N.d. “Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors.”
International Journal of Economic Sciences. N.d. “IISES Publication Ethics & Publication Malpractice Statement.”