Publion
Register

Comun Journal

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society Policies

Editorial and publication policies for Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society.

Publication Ethics

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, is committed to maintaining the integrity, credibility, transparency, and accountability of scholarly publishing. The journal upholds ethical standards for authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher.

This publication ethics statement is developed to ensure that all parties involved in the publication process understand their responsibilities and conduct scholarly communication in an honest, fair, transparent, and academically responsible manner.

The journal does not tolerate plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, manipulation of peer review, citation manipulation, unethical research practices, or any other form of publication misconduct.

Ethical Principles

The journal applies the following ethical principles in its publication process:

  1. honesty in presenting research and scholarly arguments;
  2. transparency in authorship, funding, data, and conflicts of interest;
  3. fairness in editorial evaluation and peer review;
  4. accountability of authors, editors, reviewers, and publisher;
  5. confidentiality of submitted manuscripts;
  6. respect for intellectual property;
  7. respect for research participants, communities, and institutions;
  8. protection of the integrity of the scholarly record;
  9. editorial independence from commercial, institutional, personal, political, or financial pressure.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made based on the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, originality, methodological quality, clarity of argument, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Publion supports the publication process, journal platform, editorial workflow, and long-term access to published content. Publion does not interfere with editorial decisions.

Acceptance or rejection of a manuscript must not be influenced by publication fees, institutional affiliation, seniority, personal relationship, sponsorship, commercial interest, or external pressure.

Duties of Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts are handled fairly, confidentially, and transparently.

Editors should:

  1. evaluate manuscripts based on academic merit and relevance to the journal;
  2. ensure that the peer review process is conducted properly;
  3. select reviewers with relevant expertise and no apparent conflict of interest;
  4. protect the confidentiality of authors, reviewers, and manuscripts;
  5. make editorial decisions based on scholarly quality and ethical compliance;
  6. respond appropriately to allegations of misconduct;
  7. issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions when necessary;
  8. avoid using unpublished materials from submitted manuscripts without written permission from the authors.

Editors must not handle manuscripts in which they have a direct conflict of interest. In such cases, the manuscript should be assigned to another editor who can make an independent decision.

Duties of Reviewers

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and helps authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, timely, and evidence-based evaluations.

Reviewers should:

  1. accept review invitations only when they have relevant expertise;
  2. decline the review if they cannot complete it within the required time;
  3. treat the manuscript as a confidential document;
  4. evaluate the manuscript objectively and avoid personal criticism of the author;
  5. provide clear comments supported by academic reasoning;
  6. identify relevant literature that has not been cited when appropriate;
  7. inform the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap with other published or submitted work;
  8. disclose any conflict of interest before accepting the review.

Reviewers must not use unpublished data, arguments, findings, or ideas from the manuscript for their own research, publication, teaching, institutional, commercial, or personal advantage.

Duties of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscript is original, accurate, ethical, and not under consideration by another journal.

Authors should:

  1. submit only original work that has not been published elsewhere;
  2. avoid plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, and data falsification;
  3. ensure that all sources are properly cited;
  4. ensure that all listed authors have made significant scholarly contributions;
  5. obtain consent from all co-authors before submission;
  6. disclose funding sources and potential conflicts of interest;
  7. obtain ethical approval, research permits, or informed consent when required;
  8. provide access to data when reasonably requested by the editor, subject to ethical, legal, and confidentiality considerations;
  9. inform the editor promptly if they discover a significant error in their published article;
  10. cooperate with the journal in issuing corrections, clarifications, or retractions when necessary.

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that they have read and agreed to the journal’s author guidelines, publication ethics, plagiarism policy, copyright and licensing policy, conflict of interest policy, and research ethics requirements.

Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.

All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission.

The journal does not accept honorary authorship, guest authorship, gift authorship, ghost authorship, or the exclusion of individuals who made substantial contributions.

Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged in the acknowledgment section with their consent.

Originality, Plagiarism, and Redundant Publication

Authors must ensure that their work is original and that all sources are properly acknowledged. The journal may use plagiarism detection software to screen submitted manuscripts.

Manuscripts with substantial plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, duplicate publication, redundant publication, fabricated data, falsified data, or manipulated references may be rejected.

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Concurrent submission is considered unethical and unacceptable.

Research Ethics and Consent

Research involving human participants, public officials, local communities, vulnerable groups, institutional data, confidential records, or sensitive policy issues must comply with applicable ethical standards.

Authors are responsible for obtaining ethical approval, research permits, institutional approval, or informed consent when required.

The journal may request evidence of ethical approval, informed consent, research permission, or institutional approval during the editorial process.

Research involving local communities, indigenous knowledge, culturally sensitive information, or vulnerable groups must respect the dignity, rights, consent, and protection of the communities involved.

Data Integrity and Data Availability

Authors must present data accurately and avoid fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, manipulation of findings, or misleading presentation of results.

When appropriate, authors are encouraged to provide a data availability statement explaining whether the data supporting the article are publicly available, available upon reasonable request, restricted due to confidentiality, or unavailable due to ethical or legal limitations.

For research involving confidential institutional data, government data, interviews, administrative records, or sensitive information, authors must ensure that data sharing does not violate privacy, confidentiality, legal obligations, or research ethics.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

Artificial intelligence tools may be used to support language editing, grammar checking, translation assistance, reference management, or readability improvement.

AI tools must not be listed as authors because they cannot take responsibility for the integrity, originality, accuracy, and accountability of scholarly work.

Authors remain fully responsible for all content in their manuscripts, including any part assisted by AI tools. Any use of AI that affects the substance of the manuscript, including data analysis, interpretation, argument development, or text generation, should be disclosed in the manuscript.

Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished materials to public AI tools or third-party platforms that may compromise confidentiality, data protection, or intellectual property rights.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may influence the objectivity of the publication process.

Conflicts of interest may include financial relationships, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, academic competition, political interests, consultancy roles, funding relationships, or previous collaboration between parties involved in the manuscript.

If a conflict of interest is identified, the journal will take appropriate steps to protect the integrity and fairness of the editorial process.

Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Issues

The journal is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. If significant errors or ethical concerns are identified after publication, the journal may issue a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction depending on the nature and severity of the issue.

Retraction may be considered in cases involving plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, unethical research, duplicate publication, serious methodological error, manipulated peer review, or other forms of publication misconduct.

Retraction notices will be made transparent and linked to the original article whenever possible.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, editors, institutions, or other parties may submit complaints or appeals regarding editorial decisions, review processes, publication ethics, conflicts of interest, or suspected misconduct.

Complaints and appeals should be submitted in writing to the editorial office with relevant evidence.

The journal reviews complaints fairly, confidentially, and transparently. Appeals against editorial decisions may be considered when authors provide clear evidence of procedural error, reviewer misunderstanding, conflict of interest, or substantial factual inaccuracies in the review process.

Publisher’s Responsibilities

Publion is responsible for supporting the journal platform, editorial workflow, publication infrastructure, long-term access to published content, and mechanisms to address ethical concerns.

Publion supports editors in handling publication misconduct, corrections, retractions, complaints, and appeals. Publion does not allow commercial considerations to compromise academic integrity or editorial independence.

Peer Review Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, is a peer-reviewed academic journal published by Publion. The journal applies a rigorous, transparent, fair, and academically responsible peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, relevance, and ethical integrity of all manuscripts submitted for publication.

The peer review process is designed to support editorial decision-making, improve the quality of scholarly manuscripts, and protect the credibility of the academic record. Editorial decisions are based on academic merit, relevance to the journal’s aims and scope, methodological soundness, originality, clarity of argument, ethical compliance, and contribution to the field.

Peer Review Model

The journal applies a double-blind peer review process. This means that the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed from each other throughout the review process.

Authors are required to prepare an anonymized manuscript by removing names, affiliations, acknowledgments, self-identifying references, and any other information that may reveal their identity. Reviewers are also expected to maintain confidentiality and avoid any action that may reveal their identity to the authors.

The double-blind review model is used to reduce potential bias related to institutional affiliation, academic seniority, gender, nationality, personal relationships, academic competition, or other non-academic considerations.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo initial editorial screening before being sent to reviewers. At this stage, the editorial team evaluates whether the manuscript:

  1. fits the aims and scope of the journal;
  2. follows the author guidelines and manuscript template;
  3. demonstrates sufficient academic quality for peer review;
  4. presents a clear research problem, objective, method, findings, and contribution;
  5. complies with publication ethics and research integrity standards;
  6. meets originality and plagiarism requirements;
  7. provides complete author information and manuscript metadata;
  8. uses appropriate, relevant, and properly cited references;
  9. is written in a clear, structured, and academically accountable manner.

Manuscripts may be returned to authors for technical revision before peer review if they do not follow the journal’s formatting, metadata, or submission requirements.

Manuscripts may be rejected without external review if they are outside the journal’s scope, lack sufficient scholarly quality, contain serious ethical concerns, show evidence of plagiarism or duplicate submission, or do not meet the basic standards of academic writing and research.

Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass initial editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise in the manuscript’s field, method, or topic.

Reviewers are selected based on academic competence, subject expertise, methodological knowledge, publication record, and absence of apparent conflicts of interest.

Authors are not allowed to select, assign, or contact reviewers directly. The editorial team is responsible for reviewer selection to preserve the independence and integrity of the peer review process.

Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

  1. relevance of the manuscript to the journal’s aims and scope;
  2. clarity and accuracy of the title, abstract, and keywords;
  3. significance and originality of the research problem;
  4. adequacy of the theoretical or conceptual framework;
  5. appropriateness and transparency of the research method;
  6. quality, validity, and clarity of findings;
  7. depth of analysis and discussion;
  8. connection between findings, theory, previous studies, and broader scholarly debate;
  9. contribution to the development of knowledge, practice, or policy in the journal’s field;
  10. novelty and potential scientific impact of the manuscript;
  11. quality, relevance, and currency of references;
  12. coherence between title, abstract, introduction, method, findings, discussion, and conclusion;
  13. compliance with research ethics, plagiarism policy, data integrity, conflict of interest disclosure, and publication ethics.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments. Personal criticism of authors is not acceptable. Reviewers should support their comments with clear reasoning and, where relevant, suggest areas for improvement.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review are confidential documents. Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not disclose, share, copy, cite, distribute, or use any part of the submitted manuscript for personal, academic, institutional, or commercial purposes before publication.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly regarding the manuscript. All communication between reviewers and authors must be managed through the journal’s editorial system or official editorial office.

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts or unpublished materials to public artificial intelligence tools or third-party platforms that may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or data protection.

Conflict of Interest in Review

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that may affect the objectivity of the review process.

Conflicts of interest may include financial relationships, institutional affiliation, recent collaboration, personal relationships, academic competition, political interest, funding relationship, consultancy role, or any other condition that may influence judgment.

Reviewers must decline review invitations when they have a conflict of interest or when they feel unable to provide an objective evaluation.

Review Timeline

The journal conducts the peer review process in a timely manner while maintaining academic rigor. Reviewers are expected to submit review reports within the timeframe determined by the editorial office.

If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the required period or feels unqualified to assess the manuscript, the reviewer should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Authors are notified of editorial decisions through the journal’s submission system or official editorial communication channel.

Editorial Decisions

After receiving reviewer reports, the editor makes one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept Submission;
  2. Revisions Required;
  3. Resubmit for Review;
  4. Decline Submission.

The final decision rests with the editor or editor-in-chief. Reviewer recommendations are important considerations, but they do not automatically determine the final editorial decision.

The editor considers reviewer comments, manuscript quality, ethical compliance, originality, relevance to the journal, contribution to the field, and the author’s response to revision requests.

Publication fees, institutional affiliation, personal relationships, sponsorship, or commercial considerations do not influence the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts.

Revision Process

Authors who receive a revision decision must submit a revised manuscript along with a response letter explaining how each reviewer and editor comment has been addressed.

The editor may evaluate the revised manuscript internally or return it to the original reviewers depending on the extent and substance of the revisions.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified timeframe without prior communication may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the editorial process.

Integrity of the Peer Review Process

The journal does not tolerate manipulation of the peer review process, including fake reviewer identities, fabricated reviewer reports, inappropriate reviewer suggestions, coercive citation practices, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or attempts to influence editorial decisions through personal, institutional, financial, or political pressure.

Publion supports the editorial process but does not interfere with editorial decisions. Editorial independence is maintained to protect the credibility, fairness, and integrity of the journal’s scholarly publication process.

AI Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, recognizes that artificial intelligence tools and automated technologies may be used in scholarly writing, editing, translation, research assistance, data processing, and publication workflows. The journal allows responsible and transparent use of AI tools, provided that such use does not compromise originality, accountability, confidentiality, research integrity, or publication ethics.

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial staff are responsible for ensuring that any use of AI tools complies with the journal’s ethical standards.

General Principles

The use of AI tools must follow these principles:

  1. transparency;

  2. human accountability;

  3. research integrity;

  4. confidentiality;

  5. accuracy and verification;

  6. respect for intellectual property;

  7. protection of unpublished manuscripts and research data;

  8. compliance with publication ethics.

AI tools may support scholarly work, but they cannot replace the responsibility of authors, reviewers, editors, or publishers.

AI Use by Authors

Authors may use AI tools for limited support such as:

  1. grammar checking;

  2. spelling correction;

  3. language editing;

  4. translation assistance;

  5. formatting support;

  6. reference management support;

  7. readability improvement.

Authors remain fully responsible for the content of their manuscripts, including any part assisted by AI tools.

Authors must carefully check, verify, and validate any output generated by AI tools. AI-generated content may contain factual errors, fabricated references, biased statements, misleading interpretations, or inaccurate analysis.

Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose substantial use of AI tools when such tools affect the content, analysis, interpretation, argument development, data processing, image generation, literature synthesis, or writing of the manuscript.

Routine language correction, grammar checking, spelling correction, or formatting assistance does not need to be disclosed unless it substantially changes the intellectual content of the manuscript.

When disclosure is required, authors should explain:

  1. the name of the AI tool used;

  2. the purpose of use;

  3. the part of the manuscript affected;

  4. how the output was checked and verified;

  5. whether AI use affected data analysis, interpretation, writing, or visual materials.

AI Tools Cannot Be Authors

AI tools, chatbots, large language models, automated writing systems, or other non-human tools cannot be listed as authors.

Authorship requires accountability, responsibility, ethical judgment, approval of the final manuscript, and the ability to respond to questions about the integrity of the work. AI tools cannot fulfill these responsibilities.

AI-Generated Sources and Citations

Generative AI tools must not be cited as scholarly sources unless the article specifically discusses the AI tool as an object of study.

Authors must not use AI tools to fabricate references, generate false citations, invent data, create misleading quotations, or misrepresent scholarly sources.

All references must be verified by the authors using reliable and accessible sources.

AI Use in Data Analysis

If AI tools are used for data analysis, coding, classification, image processing, text mining, statistical assistance, or interpretation, authors must explain the role of the tool in the method section or a relevant disclosure statement.

Authors must ensure that the use of AI tools does not violate research ethics, data protection, confidentiality agreements, informed consent, institutional rules, or legal obligations.

AI Use by Reviewers

Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, figures, tables, data, supplementary files, or reviewer reports to public AI tools or third-party platforms that may compromise confidentiality, intellectual property rights, or data protection.

Reviewers must not use generative AI tools to produce peer review reports in a way that replaces their own critical judgment, expertise, and accountability.

If a reviewer uses AI-assisted tools for language editing or readability improvement of their review comments, the reviewer remains fully responsible for the accuracy, fairness, confidentiality, and academic quality of the review.

AI Use by Editors

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts. They must not upload unpublished manuscripts, author data, reviewer data, editorial correspondence, or confidential materials to public AI tools or third-party platforms that may compromise confidentiality or data protection.

Editors must not rely solely on automated tools to make editorial decisions. Any use of automated tools for plagiarism checking, similarity screening, integrity checks, reviewer suggestions, metadata support, or technical screening must be overseen by humans.

Final editorial decisions must be made by responsible editors based on academic quality, peer review, ethical compliance, and journal policy.

AI and Publication Misconduct

Failure to disclose substantial AI use, use of AI to fabricate content, generation of false references, manipulation of data, undeclared AI-generated images, or use of AI in ways that violate confidentiality may be treated as publication misconduct.

The journal may request clarification from authors regarding AI use. If misuse of AI tools is identified, the manuscript may be returned, rejected, corrected, or retracted depending on the severity of the case.

Human Responsibility

Authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for their work and decisions. AI tools may assist scholarly communication, but human judgment, accountability, ethical responsibility, and academic integrity remain central to the publication process.

Open Access Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, is an open access journal published by Publion. The journal provides immediate and free access to all published content to support the wider dissemination of scholarly knowledge and to promote academic exchange in the journal’s field.

The journal follows the principle that scholarly research should be openly accessible to readers, researchers, authors, institutions, practitioners, policymakers, and the wider public without financial, legal, or technical barriers.

Open Access Statement

All articles published in Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society are freely available online immediately upon publication.

Readers are allowed to access, read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, link to the full text, crawl articles for indexing, pass article metadata to software, and use the content for lawful scholarly, educational, research, and public purposes, provided that proper attribution is given to the original author, article title, journal name, volume, issue, year, DOI when available, article landing page, and publisher.

The journal does not apply an embargo period to published articles. The full text of published articles is available without subscription fees, access charges, or mandatory registration.

Free Access to Published Content

The journal provides free access to:

  1. article metadata;
  2. abstracts;
  3. keywords;
  4. author information;
  5. article landing pages;
  6. full-text articles;
  7. PDF files, when available;
  8. citation information;
  9. license information;
  10. references.

Open access is provided to support discoverability, citation, academic exchange, public knowledge, and long-term use of published scholarly content.

Reuse Rights

Users may reuse published articles according to the applicable open license stated on the article page and in the article file.

Permitted uses may include reading, downloading, copying, distributing, printing, searching, linking, indexing, text and data mining, educational use, scholarly reuse, and other lawful uses, provided that proper attribution is given and the use follows the applicable license terms.

Users must not misrepresent authorship, alter the meaning of the work in a misleading way, remove citation information, remove license information, or use the journal’s name, publisher’s name, logo, article metadata, or published content for fraudulent, misleading, or unethical purposes.

License

Articles published in Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society are published under the applicable Creative Commons license selected by the journal.

The license allows users to understand how published content may be accessed, shared, reused, and cited. License information is displayed on the journal website, article landing pages, and article files.

The journal does not add restrictions that conflict with the terms of the applicable Creative Commons license.

Copyright

Authors retain copyright over their published articles. By submitting and publishing their manuscripts in Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, authors grant the journal the right of first publication and authorize Publion to publish, distribute, archive, preserve, and make the article available online under the applicable open license.

Open access publication does not remove the authors’ moral rights, attribution rights, or responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of their work.

Self-Archiving

Authors are allowed and encouraged to share, deposit, and distribute the published version of their article in institutional repositories, personal academic websites, research profiles, scholarly networks, or other appropriate platforms.

Self-archived articles should include the complete citation, journal name, volume, issue, year of publication, DOI when available, and a link to the official article landing page.

Open Access and Indexing

Open access supports the visibility, discoverability, indexing, and citation of published articles. The journal maintains article metadata, full-text access, license information, citation information, and article landing pages to support indexing and long-term scholarly communication.

No Embargo

The journal provides immediate open access to published articles. There is no embargo period for accessing full-text articles published in Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society.

No Subscription Requirement

The journal does not require readers to pay subscription fees to access published articles. Readers do not need institutional subscriptions to read, download, or cite published content.

No Mandatory Reader Registration

The journal does not require readers to register or log in to access the full text of published articles.

Registration may be required only for authors, reviewers, or editors who use the submission and editorial management system.

Plagiarism Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, is committed to maintaining originality, integrity, and credibility in scholarly publishing. Plagiarism in any form is considered unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.

The journal defines plagiarism as the use of another person’s words, ideas, arguments, data, images, tables, research findings, or intellectual contributions without proper acknowledgment, citation, quotation, permission, or attribution.

Plagiarism may include direct copying, close paraphrasing without proper citation, mosaic plagiarism, inappropriate text recycling, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, translation plagiarism, and the reproduction of original ideas, data, or findings from another source without proper acknowledgment.

Similarity Checking

All submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism detection software or other similarity checking tools as part of the editorial screening process.

The journal applies a maximum similarity threshold of 20% for submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts with a similarity index above this threshold may be returned to authors for correction, clarification, rewriting, or resubmission before further editorial consideration.

However, similarity percentage is not the only basis for determining plagiarism. The editorial team evaluates the context and substance of similarity, including:

  1. the source of similarity;
  2. the concentration of similarity from one or several sources;
  3. the location of similarity in the manuscript;
  4. whether the similar text appears in the method, theory, findings, discussion, or conclusion;
  5. whether the source has been properly cited;
  6. whether the similarity involves original ideas, data, findings, or standard academic expressions;
  7. whether there is evidence of intentional academic misconduct.

A manuscript with a similarity index below 20% may still be rejected if it contains serious plagiarism, copied findings, unacknowledged ideas, data manipulation, or substantial overlap with previously published work.

Limited similarity in references, institutional names, legal terms, methodology descriptions, or standard academic expressions may be considered acceptable when properly cited.

Minor Plagiarism

Minor plagiarism refers to a limited section of text that is copied, closely paraphrased, or insufficiently cited without taking substantial data, findings, or original ideas from another work.

Examples include:

  1. several sentences copied without quotation marks;
  2. close paraphrasing with incomplete citation;
  3. insufficient attribution in the literature review;
  4. technical similarity in non-substantive parts of the manuscript.

Editorial action:

The manuscript may be returned to the author for correction. The author will be required to revise the text, provide proper citation, use quotation marks where necessary, improve paraphrasing, and resubmit the manuscript. The manuscript will not proceed to peer review until the issue is resolved.

Intermediate Plagiarism

Intermediate plagiarism refers to a significant portion of the manuscript being copied, paraphrased, translated, or reused without proper acknowledgment, but without fully reproducing the central findings or original results of another publication.

Examples include:

  1. substantial copying from one or more sources without proper citation;
  2. repeated paraphrasing of another author’s argument without acknowledgment;
  3. inappropriate self-plagiarism or text recycling from the author’s previous work without transparency;
  4. duplicate use of substantial parts of a previously published article;
  5. significant overlap in the introduction, literature review, method, or discussion.

Editorial action:

The submitted manuscript will be rejected. Depending on the severity of the case, the authors may be restricted from submitting new manuscripts to the journal for a determined period. The editorial team may also notify the authors’ institution, research funder, or affiliated parties if necessary and supported by sufficient evidence.

Severe Plagiarism

Severe plagiarism refers to the substantial reproduction of another work, including original ideas, data, findings, analysis, tables, figures, results, or conclusions, without proper acknowledgment. It also includes plagiarism that indicates deliberate academic misconduct.

Examples include:

  1. copying substantial parts of another article;
  2. reproducing original data, findings, or conclusions from another publication;
  3. submitting a manuscript that is substantially identical to a published or submitted work;
  4. translating another article and presenting it as original work;
  5. using another researcher’s unpublished manuscript, data, or ideas without permission;
  6. fabricating citations to conceal plagiarism.

Editorial action:

The manuscript will be rejected immediately. If the article has already been published, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with the journal’s correction and retraction policy. The journal may also notify the authors’ institution, research funder, or other relevant parties when necessary.

Self-Plagiarism and Text Recycling

The journal recognizes that authors may build upon their previous research. However, authors must be transparent when reusing parts of their own previously published work.

Reuse of text, data, figures, tables, or arguments from the author’s previous publication must be properly cited and must not mislead readers regarding the originality of the manuscript.

Text recycling may be considered acceptable only when it is limited, properly acknowledged, does not involve duplicate publication, and does not affect the originality of the current manuscript. Reuse of substantial parts of previous work without disclosure may be treated as self-plagiarism.

Duplicate and Concurrent Submission

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Authors must also not submit a manuscript that has been published elsewhere in the same or substantially similar form.

If duplicate or concurrent submission is identified, the manuscript will be rejected. If duplicate publication is discovered after publication, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Responsibility of Authors

All authors are responsible for the originality and integrity of the submitted manuscript. By submitting a manuscript to Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, authors confirm that:

  1. the manuscript is original;
  2. the manuscript has not been published elsewhere;
  3. the manuscript is not under consideration by another journal;
  4. all sources have been properly cited;
  5. all reused text, data, tables, figures, or ideas have been acknowledged;
  6. all authors have read and approved the manuscript before submission;
  7. all authors understand and agree with the journal’s plagiarism policy.

If a plagiarism penalty is imposed, all authors listed in the manuscript may be subject to the same editorial sanction, unless there is clear evidence that responsibility can be attributed differently.

Post-Publication Plagiarism

If plagiarism is detected after publication, the journal will investigate the case in accordance with publication ethics standards.

Depending on the severity of the case, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction. Retraction may be issued when plagiarism affects the originality, reliability, validity, or ethical status of the published article.

The journal is committed to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record.

Conflict of Interest

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, requires authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and the publisher to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may influence the objectivity, fairness, transparency, or integrity of the publication process.

A conflict of interest exists when personal, financial, institutional, academic, political, professional, or other relationships may affect, or may reasonably be perceived to affect, judgment and decision-making in the submission, review, editing, publication, or dissemination of scholarly work.

Types of Conflict of Interest

Conflicts of interest may include, but are not limited to:

  1. financial relationships;
  2. employment relationships;
  3. institutional affiliations;
  4. consultancy roles;
  5. funding relationships;
  6. personal relationships;
  7. family relationships;
  8. academic competition;
  9. political interests;
  10. religious or ideological interests;
  11. previous collaboration;
  12. supervisory relationships;
  13. membership in the same research group or project;
  14. commercial interests;
  15. intellectual property interests.

Disclosure of a conflict of interest does not automatically prevent publication. However, undisclosed conflicts may compromise trust in the editorial process and may be treated as an ethical concern.

Author Responsibilities

Authors must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that may influence the research, analysis, interpretation, writing, or publication of the manuscript.

Authors should disclose conflicts related to:

  1. research funding;
  2. institutional support;
  3. employment;
  4. consultancy;
  5. honoraria;
  6. paid expert testimony;
  7. patents or intellectual property;
  8. personal relationships;
  9. political or organizational involvement;
  10. any relationship with editors, reviewers, institutions, funders, or organizations related to the manuscript.

If there is no conflict of interest, authors should state that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding Disclosure

Authors must disclose all sources of funding that supported the research, writing, or publication of the manuscript.

Funding disclosure should include the name of the funder, grant number when available, and the role of the funder in research design, data collection, data analysis, interpretation, writing, or publication decision.

If the funder had no role in the research or publication process, this should be stated clearly.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest before accepting a review invitation.

Reviewers should decline the review if they:

  1. have a close personal or professional relationship with the author;
  2. have recently collaborated with the author;
  3. work at the same institution as the author;
  4. have supervised or been supervised by the author;
  5. have a financial or institutional interest in the manuscript;
  6. have academic competition or personal bias related to the manuscript;
  7. feel unable to provide an objective and fair evaluation.

Reviewers must not use unpublished manuscript content for personal, academic, institutional, commercial, or professional advantage.

Editor Responsibilities

Editors must not handle manuscripts in which they have a direct conflict of interest.

If an editor has a conflict of interest, the manuscript should be assigned to another editor or editorial board member who can make an independent and objective decision.

Editors must ensure that reviewer selection, editorial evaluation, and publication decisions are not influenced by financial, institutional, personal, political, or commercial interests.

Publisher Responsibilities

Publion supports editorial independence and does not interfere with editorial decisions.

Publication fees, sponsorship, institutional relationships, commercial interests, or publisher interests must not influence acceptance, rejection, peer review, editorial decisions, corrections, or retractions.

Handling Undisclosed Conflicts

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is discovered before publication, the journal may request clarification, require a disclosure statement, assign a different editor or reviewer, return the manuscript, or reject the manuscript depending on the seriousness of the case.

If an undisclosed conflict of interest is discovered after publication, the journal may issue a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction when necessary.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Authors are encouraged to include a conflict of interest statement in the manuscript.

Example when there is no conflict:

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to this manuscript.

Example when there is a conflict:

The authors declare the following potential conflict of interest: [describe the conflict clearly].

Data Availability Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, encourages transparency, accountability, and responsible data management in scholarly research. Data availability supports research verification, reproducibility, citation, academic integrity, and further scholarly development.

Authors are encouraged to provide a data availability statement explaining whether the data supporting the findings of the article are publicly available, available upon reasonable request, restricted, confidential, or not available due to ethical, legal, institutional, or privacy limitations.

Purpose of Data Availability

The data availability policy is intended to:

  1. support transparency in research;
  2. help readers understand the basis of the findings;
  3. allow verification of research results when appropriate;
  4. encourage responsible data sharing;
  5. protect confidential, sensitive, personal, or legally restricted data;
  6. promote ethical and accountable research practices.

Data Availability Statement

Authors should include a data availability statement when applicable.

The statement should explain:

  1. whether data are publicly available;
  2. where the data can be accessed;
  3. whether data are available upon reasonable request;
  4. whether access is restricted due to confidentiality, ethics, law, or institutional rules;
  5. whether data are not available and why;
  6. whether supplementary materials are provided with the article.

Publicly Available Data

When data are publicly available, authors should provide sufficient information to help readers access the data.

This may include repository name, dataset title, persistent identifier, DOI, URL, accession number, or other access information.

Authors should ensure that publicly shared data do not violate confidentiality, consent, privacy, copyright, institutional restrictions, or legal obligations.

Data Available Upon Request

When data cannot be made publicly available but may be shared with qualified researchers, authors may state that the data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Authors should explain the conditions for access, especially when data involve confidentiality, research participants, institutions, sensitive topics, or third-party restrictions.

Restricted or Confidential Data

Some data cannot be shared publicly because of ethical, legal, privacy, security, institutional, contractual, or cultural reasons.

Restricted data may include:

  1. personal data;
  2. interview transcripts;
  3. confidential institutional records;
  4. government administrative data;
  5. sensitive policy documents;
  6. health-related data;
  7. commercially confidential data;
  8. data involving vulnerable groups;
  9. culturally sensitive community knowledge;
  10. data protected by consent agreements.

In such cases, authors should provide a clear explanation of the restriction without exposing confidential information.

No Data Availability

For conceptual articles, theoretical papers, literature reviews, essays, commentaries, or manuscripts that do not generate or analyze datasets, authors may state that data availability is not applicable.

Supplementary Materials

Authors may provide supplementary materials when they support transparency and understanding of the article.

Supplementary materials may include questionnaires, interview guides, coding frameworks, additional tables, appendices, instruments, methodological notes, or non-sensitive supporting data.

Supplementary files must comply with ethical standards, copyright rules, privacy protection, and journal policies.

Author Responsibility

Authors are responsible for ensuring that data sharing complies with research ethics, informed consent, privacy protection, copyright, institutional rules, funding requirements, and legal obligations.

Authors must not share data in a way that may harm participants, expose confidential information, violate consent, or misrepresent the research.

Data Integrity

Authors must present data accurately and honestly. Data fabrication, falsification, selective reporting, image manipulation, or misleading presentation of results is considered publication misconduct.

If data integrity concerns are identified before or after publication, the journal may investigate and take appropriate editorial action, including correction, expression of concern, or retraction.

Correction and Retraction Policy

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, is committed to maintaining the accuracy, integrity, transparency, and reliability of the scholarly record. The journal provides mechanisms for correcting, clarifying, or retracting published content when necessary.

Post-publication updates may include corrections, clarifications, expressions of concern, or retractions depending on the nature and severity of the issue.

Purpose

The correction and retraction policy is intended to:

  1. protect the integrity of the scholarly record;
  2. correct significant errors in published content;
  3. alert readers to ethical or reliability concerns;
  4. provide transparent information about post-publication changes;
  5. ensure accountability of authors, editors, reviewers, and publisher.

Corrections

A correction may be issued when a published article contains an error that affects understanding, citation, metadata, interpretation, or part of the scholarly record, but does not invalidate the overall findings or conclusions.

Corrections may address:

  1. author name errors;
  2. affiliation errors;
  3. metadata errors;
  4. citation errors;
  5. figure or table errors;
  6. minor data errors;
  7. typographical errors affecting meaning;
  8. missing acknowledgments;
  9. funding statement errors;
  10. conflict of interest statement errors;
  11. license or copyright information errors.

Correction notices will be linked to the original article whenever possible. The original article may be updated with a note explaining the correction.

Clarifications

A clarification may be issued when additional information is needed to explain part of a published article, editorial decision, metadata record, or publication process.

Clarifications may be used when the article remains valid but readers require additional context.

Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when serious concerns are raised about a published article but the investigation is not yet complete or evidence is inconclusive.

An expression of concern may be issued in cases involving:

  1. suspected plagiarism;
  2. suspected data fabrication or falsification;
  3. suspected unethical research;
  4. unresolved authorship dispute;
  5. serious conflict of interest concerns;
  6. questionable peer review process;
  7. unresolved institutional investigation;
  8. concerns about reliability of findings.

The expression of concern will remain linked to the article until the issue is resolved.

Retraction

A retraction may be issued when a published article is found to be seriously unreliable, unethical, duplicated, plagiarized, or otherwise invalid.

Retraction may be considered in cases involving:

  1. plagiarism;
  2. data fabrication;
  3. data falsification;
  4. duplicate publication;
  5. serious methodological error;
  6. unethical research;
  7. lack of required informed consent;
  8. breach of confidentiality;
  9. manipulated peer review;
  10. fraudulent authorship;
  11. undisclosed conflict of interest affecting the article;
  12. copyright infringement;
  13. major errors that invalidate the findings or conclusions.

Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record, not to punish authors.

Retraction Notice

A retraction notice will be published and linked to the original article whenever possible. The notice should clearly state the reason for retraction and identify who initiated the retraction.

The original article may remain accessible to preserve the scholarly record, but it will be clearly marked as retracted.

Author-Initiated Correction or Retraction

Authors must notify the journal promptly if they discover a significant error, ethical problem, or reliability issue in their published article.

Authors are expected to cooperate with the editorial team in correcting, clarifying, or retracting the article when necessary.

Reader or Third-Party Reports

Readers, reviewers, institutions, or other parties may report concerns about published articles. Reports should be submitted to the journal with relevant evidence.

The journal will review post-publication concerns fairly, confidentially, and transparently.

Editorial Investigation

When a concern is raised, the editorial team may:

  1. review the article and related documents;
  2. contact the authors for explanation;
  3. consult reviewers or editorial board members;
  4. request raw data or supporting documents;
  5. contact institutions or research funders when necessary;
  6. seek independent advice when appropriate.

Editorial action will be based on the evidence available and the seriousness of the issue.

Publisher Responsibility

Publion supports the journal in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. Publion supports the publication of correction notices, expressions of concern, and retraction notices when required.

Publication infrastructure, metadata records, article landing pages, and archive records will be updated when post-publication notices are issued.

Complaints and Appeals

Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society, ISSN 3125-0955, provides a transparent process for handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, peer review, publication ethics, conflicts of interest, corrections, retractions, author charges, indexing information, and publication processes.

The journal is committed to handling complaints and appeals fairly, confidentially, respectfully, and in a timely manner.

Scope of Complaints

Complaints may relate to:

  1. editorial process;
  2. peer review process;
  3. reviewer conduct;
  4. editor conduct;
  5. publication ethics;
  6. plagiarism concerns;
  7. authorship disputes;
  8. conflicts of interest;
  9. correction or retraction requests;
  10. publication fees;
  11. communication problems;
  12. metadata or indexing information;
  13. copyright or licensing concerns;
  14. research ethics concerns.

Complaints should be submitted in writing and supported by relevant evidence.

Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision if they believe that there has been a procedural error, reviewer misunderstanding, factual inaccuracy, conflict of interest, or substantial issue in the editorial process.

Appeals must provide clear reasons and evidence. Appeals based only on disagreement with the editorial judgment are unlikely to be accepted.

An appeal does not guarantee that the decision will be changed.

How to Submit a Complaint or Appeal

Complaints and appeals should be submitted through the official journal contact:

Email:
WhatsApp:
Journal: Comun: Journal of Communication and Digital Society
Publisher: Publion

The complaint or appeal should include:

  1. name of the complainant;
  2. contact information;
  3. manuscript title, when applicable;
  4. submission ID or article URL, when available;
  5. description of the issue;
  6. supporting evidence;
  7. expected resolution.

Anonymous complaints may be considered when they provide credible evidence, but the journal may be limited in its ability to investigate or respond.

Initial Assessment

The editorial team will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the complaint or appeal falls within the journal’s scope and whether sufficient information has been provided.

If the complaint lacks necessary details, the journal may request additional information.

Review Process

Complaints and appeals may be reviewed by the editor-in-chief, handling editor, editorial board member, publisher representative, or independent adviser depending on the nature of the issue.

If the complaint involves a specific editor, reviewer, or editorial board member, that person will not be involved in reviewing the complaint.

Possible Outcomes

After reviewing the complaint or appeal, the journal may decide to:

  1. uphold the original editorial decision;
  2. request additional review;
  3. assign a different editor or reviewer;
  4. request manuscript revision;
  5. correct a procedural error;
  6. issue a correction or clarification;
  7. issue an expression of concern;
  8. retract an article;
  9. update metadata or policy information;
  10. reject the complaint or appeal if unsupported by evidence.

Confidentiality

Complaints and appeals will be handled confidentially. Information will be shared only with parties who need to be involved in the investigation or resolution.

The journal will protect the confidentiality of authors, reviewers, editors, complainants, and research participants whenever possible.

Appeals Limitation

The journal normally considers one appeal per manuscript decision. Repeated appeals without new evidence may not be considered.

The final decision after appeal rests with the editor-in-chief or the designated editorial authority.

Good Faith and Professional Conduct

Complainants are expected to communicate respectfully and in good faith. The journal will not tolerate abusive language, threats, harassment, intimidation, or attempts to influence editorial decisions through personal, institutional, financial, political, or other non-academic pressure.

Publisher Support

Publion supports the journal in handling complaints and appeals, maintaining editorial records, updating publication notices, and preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.

Publion does not interfere with editorial decisions but supports transparent and accountable complaint handling.