Peer Review Ethics in Iranian Scientific Journals: Evidence-Based Case Study of the Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM)

The present study investigates Peer Review Ethics (PRE) in scientific journals in Iran, with a specific focus on compiling the PRE statement for the Journal of Information Processing and Management (JIPM). Moreover, qualitative analysis was conducted on the PRE statements of the journals published by the Ministry of Science, Research, and Technology (MSRT). The review process and documents of the JIPM were then analyzed. This evidence-based case study was conducted using a mixed-method approach, which included three research methods: researcher-based, data-based, and research-based. A focus group discussion (FGD) was also conducted to validate the research findings. The findings showed that PRE elements were classified such as “timeliness,” “confidentiality,” “bias,” “conflict of interest,” “research misconduct,” “respectful and fair expressions,” “constructive and objective feedback,” and “accountability and responsibility.” The analysis of ethical statements in MSRT journals found that only half of the journals published PRE statements. In addition, 102 instances of violations of PRE, accounting for 15% of each review, were identified in documents submitted for review in JIPM.