Ethical Considerations

Publication Ethics

Ethical publishing is a shared responsibility of authors, reviewers, editors, the Editorial Board, and the publisher. The journal’s policies rest on the following principles.

Guiding Principles

Research integrity. Submissions must represent the work actually carried out, with methods, data, findings, and conclusions reported accurately and no fabrication, falsification, or selective omission.

Editorial independence. Decisions rest on scholarly quality alone: originality, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope. Commercial, political, institutional, and personal interests play no part.

Transparency. The journal keeps its procedures clear, states its policies publicly, and gives reasons for its decisions where appropriate.

Reliability of the record. The journal’s responsibility does not end at publication; it will correct or clarify the record when credible evidence shows this is needed.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors must:

  • Submit original work and report methods, data, and findings accurately.
  • Acknowledge the work of others and cite sources properly.
  • Name as authors only those who made a substantial intellectual contribution.
  • Provide the data, programs, and code needed to replicate the results, or state why any material cannot be shared.
  • Disclose all sources of financial support and any interest a reader might reasonably see as relevant to the findings.
  • Obtain ethical approval for research involving human subjects, and register trials or experiments where this applies.
  • Meet applicable ethical and legal requirements, and cooperate with the journal on any question raised before or after publication.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers give independent, objective, and confidential judgements based on scholarly merit. A reviewer should:

  • Keep the manuscript confidential and not enter any part of it into generative-AI tools,
  • Decline when a conflict of interest, recent collaboration, or dispute could affect the judgement.
  • Open with a short summary, then give major and minor points, keep private remarks to the editor separate from comments to the authors, and stay constructive.
  • Recommend accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject, and return the report within four to six weeks, telling the editor early if more time is needed.

PDR thanks its reviewers each year with a token of appreciation. To join the reviewer pool, see “Become a Reviewer.”

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors run the review process with fairness, consistency, and independence. They keep submissions confidential, choose qualified reviewers, weigh reports on their merits, manage competing interests, act on ethical concerns, and keep decisions free from outside pressure.

Handling Ethical Concerns

Questions about the integrity of submitted or published work are examined carefully and in confidence. The journal weighs the evidence and lets those involved respond before deciding, and it may ask for clarification, documentation, revision, or correction as needed to protect the record.

Maintaining the Published Record

When new information shows that published work needs clarification, amendment, or removal, the journal may issue a correction, an editorial expression of concern, or a retraction. These steps keep the record accurate rather than punish.

Continuing Development

As research and publishing practices change, including those linked to open data, replication, and artificial intelligence, the journal reviews its policies from time to time to keep them effective.