Research & Publication Ethics

Pakistan Business Review (PBR) is committed to the highest standards of integrity in scholarly publishing and to preventing publication malpractice. The journal adheres to the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, WAME) and aligns its decisions and procedures with COPE Guidance. PBR evaluates manuscripts solely on scholarly merit—originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and significance—without regard to authors’ characteristics or affiliations. Editorial independence is paramount; final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief based on peer-review reports and the journal’s scope.

Authorship & Contributorship

Authorship must reflect substantial scholarly contributions (e.g., conception/design, data collection, analysis/interpretation, drafting or critical revision, and approval of the final version). All authors share responsibility for the content and must approve the submitted and accepted versions. Routine tasks such as general supervision, fundraising, or data entry alone do not qualify for authorship; such contributions should be acknowledged. Any change to authorship (addition, removal, order) after submission requires written consent from all listed authors and an explanation of the reason for the change.

Originality, Plagiarism & Text-Reuse

Submissions must be original, unpublished, and not under consideration elsewhere. PBR screens manuscripts using similarity-checking software (Turnitin). As a rule, the overall similarity index must be <19%, and no single source should exceed 5%. Text recycling (“self-plagiarism”), duplicate or redundant publication, data fabrication/falsification, image manipulation, and salami slicing are prohibited. Suspected cases are investigated following COPE flowcharts and may lead to rejection, retraction, and/or author sanctions.

Use of AI Tools

AI tools (e.g., large language models) cannot be listed as authors and must not replace human scholarly contribution. Limited use for language polishing is permissible, but authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of all content. Any substantive use of AI tools must be disclosed in the manuscript (e.g., Methods or Acknowledgments). AI-generated text is treated as a single source for similarity screening and must not materially contribute to the work’s novelty or analysis.

Data Integrity, Availability & Transparency

Authors must present data and results accurately without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation. Methods should be described with sufficient detail to permit replication. Where feasible, authors are encouraged to provide a data availability statement and to deposit datasets, code, and materials in reputable repositories, subject to ethical and legal constraints. Image editing is acceptable only for clarity and must not alter, obscure, move, remove, or introduce features.

Human & Animal Research Ethics

Research involving humans or animals must comply with internationally recognized ethical standards and local regulations. Authors must state in the manuscript that ethics committee/IRB approval was obtained (including the approving body and reference number, where applicable) and that informed consent was obtained from participants or their legal guardians (for minors or individuals lacking capacity). Confidentiality and the dignity of participants must be protected; potentially identifying information should not be published without explicit consent. Animal research must follow recognized welfare guidelines and minimize harm.

Conflicts of Interest & Funding

All authors, editors, and reviewers must declare any competing interests (financial, professional, or personal) that could be perceived to influence the work. Authors must include a Competing Interests Statement and a Funding Statement (with grant numbers where applicable) in the manuscript; editors and reviewers with relevant conflicts must recuse themselves. PBR’s full Competing Interests Policy applies to all parties engaged in the editorial process.

Peer Review Ethics & Confidentiality

PBR operates a double-blind peer review. Editors select qualified, independent reviewers and ensure timely, constructive, and unbiased evaluations. Manuscripts and review materials are confidential; reviewers may not share, cite, or use unpublished material for personal advantage. Reviewers must disclose conflicts, decline reviews outside their expertise, and alert the editor to suspected ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, image manipulation, duplicate publication).

Editorial Independence, Appeals & Complaints

Editorial decisions are independent and based on scholarly criteria and reviewer input. Authors may appeal a decision by writing to the editorial office with a reasoned response addressing reviewers’ and editors’ critiques; appeals are considered by the Editor-in-Chief (or a designate not involved in the original decision) and may result in upholding the decision, inviting revision, or seeking an additional review. Complaints about editorial process or publication ethics are investigated promptly and fairly in accordance with COPE guidance.

Corrections, Retractions & Expressions of Concern

When errors are discovered post-publication, PBR will maintain the integrity of the scholarly record through notices of correction for honest errors that do not invalidate findings, retractions for major unreliability or misconduct, and expressions of concern when there is unresolved evidence of possible misconduct or unreliability. Notices follow COPE guidance, are linked to the original article, and are freely available.