Our commitment

Informatica is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics and to protecting the integrity of the scholarly record. We take reasonable measures to prevent, detect, investigate, and address publication malpractice.

This statement is designed to align with widely recognized best-practice expectations for journals (including the transparency and ethics policy areas adopted in Scopus evaluation guidance).

1) Peer review and editorial oversight

All primary research articles are subject to external peer review and editorial oversight, and the journal provides a public description of its peer-review process. 

Informatica peer-review model (summary):

• Single-blind peer review (reviewers are anonymized; authors are not). Manuscripts do not need to be anonymized.
• Typically at least two independent referees review the manuscript (with reviewer selection managed by the editors). 
• Editorial decisions are based on scholarly merit and relevance to scope, and may include: accept, minor revision, major revision, reject. 

2) Authors’ responsibilities

2.1 Authorship and contributorship

• Authorship must accurately reflect substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study.
• All authors must approve the final version and agree to submission.
• Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

2.2 Originality and exclusive submission

• Submissions must be original, not previously published, and not under review elsewhere.
• Any overlap with prior work (including translations, extended versions, or reused material) must be disclosed at submission and properly cited.
• Conference extensions are acceptable when they contain substantial new content and the prior version is cited (see Guide for Authors).

2.3 Proper citation and research integrity

Plagiarism, fabricated data, falsified results, inappropriate image manipulation, and misrepresentation of findings are unacceptable.

2.4 Text reuse and self-plagiarism

Reuse of the authors’ own previously published text/results is permitted only when it is clearly identified, properly cited, and consistent with copyright/licensing terms.

2.5 Conflicts of interest and funding

Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the work. Funding sources should be stated clearly.

2.6 Data sharing and reproducibility

To support reproducibility, authors are encouraged to:

• describe methods and materials in sufficient detail;
• share data, code, and/or models via trusted repositories when feasible; and
• include a Data/Code Availability statement when appropriate.

If sharing is restricted (privacy, security, contractual limits, or IP), authors must state the reason and describe any access conditions.

2.7 Ethical oversight

Where applicable (e.g., user studies, human participants, sensitive data), authors must confirm compliance with relevant laws and institutional requirements, including informed consent and privacy protections where required.

2.8 Changes to authorship

Any change to the author list/order during review requires:

• written consent from all listed authors, and
• editorial approval.

Improper or undisclosed authorship changes may result in rejection.

2.9 Use of automated and AI-assisted tools (authors)

Authors may use AI-assisted or language-support tools to improve readability and presentation, but:

• the scientific contribution (ideas, methods, analysis, conclusions) must remain the authors’ own;
• authors remain fully responsible for accuracy, originality, and proper citation; and
• AI tools must not be listed as authors.

Material use of generative AI (e.g., substantial drafting, figure generation, code generation, analysis assistance) should be disclosed in the manuscript (e.g., Acknowledgements or Methods), including what tool was used and for what purpose.

3) Reviewers’ responsibilities

3.1 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts and all associated materials as confidential and must not use unpublished information for personal advantage.

3.2 Objectivity and timeliness

Reviews must be fair, constructive, evidence-based, and submitted on time. Reviewers must declare conflicts of interest and decline review when appropriate.

3.3 Scholarly diligence

Reviewers should point out relevant work not cited and report suspected ethical issues (e.g., plagiarism, duplicate submission, fabricated results, unethical research).

3.4 Use of automated and AI-assisted tools (reviewers)

Reviewers must not compromise confidentiality. Manuscripts (or substantial portions) must not be uploaded into tools/services that may store, reuse, or disclose content without explicit permission and safeguards.

Automated tools may assist (e.g., readability checks, reference checking), but must not replace human scholarly judgment. Reviewers remain responsible for their reports.

4) Editors’ responsibilities

4.1 Fair and independent editorial decisions

Editors ensure a fair, unbiased, and transparent peer-review process. Decisions are made independently of commercial or personal interests.

4.2 Decision criteria

Manuscripts are evaluated on academic merit, originality, clarity, methodological soundness, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

4.3 Confidentiality and data protection

Editors maintain confidentiality of submissions and reviewer identities (where applicable) and handle personal data responsibly.

4.4 Integrity safeguards

The journal may use screening measures such as similarity/anti-plagiarism checks as part of editorial assessment.

Editors will also be alert to attempts at manipulation (e.g., fabricated reviewer identities, paper-mill submissions, citation manipulation, falsified authorship).

4.5 Handling misconduct

Allegations of misconduct are investigated. Actions may include requesting explanations/data, rejection, contacting institutions, and post-publication corrections or retractions where necessary.

5) Complaints and appeals

5.1 Right to appeal

Authors may appeal decisions when they believe there was a factual misunderstanding, procedural error, bias, or an undisclosed conflict of interest.

5.2 How to submit

Appeals/complaints should be submitted in writing to the editorial office and include:

• manuscript title and reference number,
• a clear description of the concern, and
• supporting evidence where applicable.

Appeals may be handled by an editor not involved in the original decision. Final decisions after appeal are binding.

6) Corrections, retractions, and expressions of concern

When changes to the scholarly record are needed, the journal may issue:

• Corrections (errata/corrigenda) for significant errors;
• Retractions for unreliable findings due to misconduct or major error, plagiarism, duplicate publication, or unethical research; and
• Expressions of concern when an investigation is ongoing but readers should be alerted.

Notices will be clearly labeled, dated, and linked to the original article to preserve record integrity. 

7) Intellectual property

Authors are responsible for ensuring they have the rights to publish all included content (text, figures, tables, data, and software) and for obtaining permissions where required. Copyright, licensing, and reuse terms are described on the Open Access & Licensing page and in the journal’s publication notices.

8) Post-publication discussion

The journal welcomes post-publication discussion and documented concerns. Readers may contact the editorial office with substantiated issues; the journal may publish responses, commentary, corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions as appropriate.

9) Integrity of the scholarly literature

To protect the scholarly record, Informatica maintains policies and procedures to address integrity risks, including (but not limited to):

• plagiarism and redundant publication,
• data fabrication/falsification,
• citation manipulation (including coercive or irrelevant citations),
• authorship manipulation,
• peer-review manipulation,
• undisclosed conflicts of interest.

10) Transparency about journal operations

The journal commits to accurate, up-to-date website information and transparent statements about its access model and any fees. 

Ethics contact

For ethics questions, suspected misconduct, complaints, or appeals, please contact the Informatica editorial office via the Contact / Journal Help page.