Code of conduct for conference proceedings organizers and peer reviewers

All conference proceedings published by Taylor & Francis must meet the same rigorous standards of integrity and peer review as our other academic content.

Basic principles:

Transparency so readers are aware of how the content was evaluated.
Accountability so readers are aware of who evaluated the work and passed it for publication.
Integrity so readers can be confident that all efforts have been made to make sure that published works are free from ethics and integrity concerns.

vector illustration of a giant plant pot with a coral light bulb growing out of it, with a female character watering it.

Publishing tips, direct to your inbox

Expert tips and guidance on getting published and maximizing the impact of your research. Register now for monthly insights direct to your inbox.

Editorial responsibilities

All persons with editorial responsibility in relation to content published by Taylor & Francis are expected to comply with a set of minimum standards to help make sure our journals publish quality, trustworthy content.

Taylor & Francis editors must follow our code of conduct for editors. These standards also apply to all persons involved in making editorial decisions about the content of conference proceedings published by Taylor & Francis (including by Routledge, CRC Press or any other imprint of Taylor & Francis). These standards apply regardless of whether the conference proceedings are published in a journal or as a book.

Vector illustration of a pink flag on a flag pole.

We are aware that conference proceedings are occasionally exploited by paper mills (entities that manipulate publication processes for financial gain). This is a serious breach of publication ethics, and any suspicion of paper mill activity will be investigated to its fullest extent.

The following points in this code of conduct are intended to avoid any such exploitation by paper mills and/or any other editorial misconduct.

Editorial decision makers for conference proceedings (including abstracts, articles and books):

Have ultimate responsibility for the decision to accept an article or abstract for publication.
Agree to be publicly named as the editorial decision maker(s) on publication of their conference proceedings.
Must be aware of their own potential conflicts of interests and recuse themselves from handling conference proceedings manuscripts or abstracts where conflicts of interests exist.
Must make sure that the evaluation process for conference proceedings (peer review) is conducted by appropriately qualified individuals who are free from conflicts of interest, particularly regarding relationships with authors of manuscripts or abstracts.
Are responsible for monitoring and seeking justification for changes in authorship of submissions, particularly cases where new authors are added to a submission.

Are responsible for assessing the appropriateness of any requests by reviewers to authors to add citations to their work, particularly if the citations are authored by the reviewer(s).
Are responsible, as far as is possible, for screening submissions for potentially fabricated content.
Are responsible for maintaining detailed records of editorial communications with authors and peer reviewers, peer reviewer reports and documentation of editorial decisions, and should be prepared to make them available to the publisher if requested as part of a misconduct investigation or an audit.
Are responsible for working with the event organizers to eliminate any paper mill related activity.
Are responsible for alerting Taylor & Francis if paper mill activity or any other type of misconduct is suspected.
Are responsible for ensuring that peer reviewers are aware of their obligations as peer reviewers as outlined below.

Peer reviewer responsibilities

These responsibilities apply to peer reviewers of conference proceedings in the form of abstracts and manuscripts regardless of whether they are published in Taylor & Francis journals or as books by Routledge, CRC Press, or any other imprint of Taylor & Francis.

Peer reviewers of conference proceedings content should:

Be aware of and follow COPE’s ethical guidelines for peer reviewers.
Recuse themselves from peer reviewing an abstract or manuscript if they have a conflict of interest, particularly any relationships with the authors of abstracts or manuscripts.
Be appropriately qualified in the subject matter of the abstract or manuscript.
Should monitor and flag (to the person with editorial responsibility) any changes in authorship, particularly if new authors are added to an abstract or manuscript.
Should provide detailed constructive reports that reference specific aspects of the manuscript or abstract related to the soundness and integrity of the content.
Should provide a scientific justification for any requests to authors to add citations to their own (the reviewer’s) work.
As far as is possible, actively look for evidence of fabrication and report any concerns to the person with editorial responsibility.
Be prepared to make their peer review reports available to the publisher.

Any published conference proceedings content that is suspected to be part of a paper mill or which is suspected of any other form of editorial misconduct activity will be retracted or removed from circulation, as applicable. The person(s) responsible for editorial decision making and peer review may be named in the retraction notice(s).

The investigation of paper mill activity may include scrutinizing the activity of and involving the employers of authors, peer reviewers and editors. Read more about how Taylor & Francis investigates general integrity concerns .