Horizon Academic Press is committed to the highest standards of research and publication integrity. Our publication-ethics and malpractice framework follows the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and draws on the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and other internationally recognised guidance. These expectations apply to authors, reviewers, editors and the publisher across all our journals.
Authorship and contributorship
Authorship should be based on substantial contribution to the work, as reflected in the ICMJE criteria: (1) substantial contributions to conception or design, or the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of data; (2) drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; (3) final approval of the version to be published; and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Everyone who meets the criteria is listed; those who contributed but do not meet them are acknowledged. All listed authors approve the submission and its author order. Requests to add, remove or reorder authors after submission must be agreed by all authors and explained to the editor. Guest, gift and ghost authorship are not acceptable.
Use of artificial intelligence
Generative AI tools cannot be listed as authors, because they cannot take responsibility for the work. Authors who use AI or AI-assisted tools in the preparation of a manuscript (for example for drafting, editing, coding or figure generation) must disclose this in the manuscript, and remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality and integrity of the content. Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or any part of them to AI tools, as this breaches confidentiality.
Originality, plagiarism and redundant publication
Submitted work must be original and properly attributed. Plagiarism in any form — including verbatim copying, paraphrasing without credit, and self-plagiarism — is not acceptable. Submissions are screened for originality and text overlap. Simultaneous submission to more than one journal, and redundant or duplicate publication of substantially the same work, are not permitted; any related prior or concurrent work must be disclosed at submission.
Data integrity and research ethics
Fabrication or falsification of data, and inappropriate manipulation of images or results, constitute serious misconduct. Research involving human participants must have appropriate ethics approval and informed consent, and must respect participants' privacy, dignity and welfare; research involving animals must comply with applicable regulations and welfare standards. Authors should provide a data availability statement (see our Data Availability policy) and be prepared to provide underlying data on reasonable request.
Conflicts of interest and funding
Authors, reviewers and editors must disclose any financial or non-financial competing interests that could be perceived to influence the work. Authors must declare all sources of funding and the role of any funder. Editors and reviewers recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict.
Confidentiality and peer-review integrity
Manuscripts under review are confidential and must not be shared, cited or used before publication, or uploaded to third-party or AI services. Reviewers provide honest, constructive and timely assessments, declare conflicts, and do not use privileged information for personal advantage. Our peer-review process is described in our Editorial Policies.
Editorial independence
Editorial decisions rest solely with the journal's editors and are made on scholarly merit, fit with scope and ethical soundness — never on authors' nationality, institution, gender, beliefs or ability to pay. The publisher does not intervene in individual editorial decisions.
Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern
We are committed to maintaining the integrity of the published record. Where warranted, and in line with COPE guidance, we publish corrections for significant errors, expressions of concern where integrity is in question but unresolved, and retractions where findings are unreliable or the work is seriously flawed or unethical. Such notices are linked to the original article, clearly labelled, and freely available; the original article is retained as part of the scholarly record.
Handling misconduct, complaints and appeals
Allegations of misconduct are taken seriously and investigated in line with the relevant COPE flowcharts, in cooperation with authors' institutions and funders where appropriate; the parties are given an opportunity to respond. Authors may appeal an editorial decision by writing to the journal's editorial office with a substantive, point-by-point response; appeals are considered by an editor not involved in the original decision where possible. Complaints about process, ethics or conduct may be raised with the editorial office and, if unresolved, escalated to the publisher. To raise a concern, appeal or complaint, contact us.