Publication Policies

Peer Review Process

  1. Submission through the online journal system.
  2. Administrative screening for completeness, scope, formatting, declarations, and required files.
  3. Similarity screening using Turnitin or another approved similarity-checking system.
  4. Editorial evaluation for scope, originality, academic quality, methodological appropriateness, and contribution.
  5. Double-blind external peer review by at least two independent reviewers for suitable manuscripts.
  6. Editorial decision: Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject.
  7. Revision and point-by-point author response where required.
  8. Re-evaluation by the editor and/or reviewers.
  9. Final decision by the Editor-in-Chief or authorized editor.
  10. Production, including copyediting, proofreading, typesetting, author proof approval, and publication.

The expected time to the first editorial decision is approximately 4–6 weeks, subject to reviewer availability and the nature of any revisions required.

Originality, Similarity and Duplicate Submission

GJBE accepts original work that has not been substantially published elsewhere and is not under consideration by another journal. Manuscripts are screened for text similarity. A maximum similarity index of 15% is applied together with editorial assessment, as a similarity percentage alone does not determine plagiarism.

Authorship and Contributions

Authorship is limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions, approved the submitted version, accepted responsibility for their contributions, and agreed to the author order. Gift, guest, and ghost authorship are not acceptable. Multi-author manuscripts must include an author-contribution statement.

Conflicts of Interest, Funding and Acknowledgments

Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose relationships or interests that could reasonably influence, or appear to influence, the research, review, or editorial process. Authors must disclose all financial support associated with the research. Individuals or organizations that contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria may be acknowledged with appropriate consent.

Research Ethics and Data Integrity

Research involving human participants must comply with applicable ethical principles and institutional requirements. Where applicable, authors must provide the name of the approving ethics committee or Institutional Review Board, approval details, and informed-consent information. Participant privacy and confidentiality must be protected. Fabrication, falsification, and inappropriate manipulation of research data are prohibited.

Data Availability

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether supporting data are publicly available, available from the corresponding author on reasonable request, restricted for confidentiality, ethical, legal, or commercial reasons, or not applicable. Public data deposition is encouraged where lawful and appropriate.

Generative AI

Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors. Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, analysis, interpretation, and ethical compliance of submitted work. Substantive use of generative AI in manuscript preparation or research must be disclosed where appropriate. Editors and reviewers must not upload confidential unpublished manuscripts to external AI systems where confidentiality, data protection, or intellectual-property safeguards cannot be guaranteed.

Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern

GJBE may issue corrections, errata, or corrigenda when significant post-publication errors are identified. Articles may be retracted where reliable evidence indicates fabrication or falsification, serious plagiarism, duplicate publication, unethical research, serious authorship misconduct, or errors that invalidate the main conclusions. Where serious concerns remain unresolved during an investigation, the journal may issue an Expression of Concern. All notices are linked clearly to the affected article.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors and readers may submit a reasoned appeal or complaint concerning editorial decisions, peer-review procedures, ethical concerns, published content, research misconduct, or conflicts of interest. Appeals must include supporting evidence and, where practicable, are reviewed by a person who was not directly responsible for the disputed decision.

Editorial Independence and Research Misconduct

Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit, relevance, originality, methodological quality, and contribution to the field. The publisher or sponsoring institution does not interfere with individual editorial decisions.

Credible allegations of plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, improper authorship, peer-review manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other ethical violations are investigated and addressed through appropriate publication-ethics procedures.