Competing Interests and Research Funding

JGTSS asks readers to evaluate scholarship with a clear understanding of relationships that could affect its design, interpretation or presentation. A disclosed interest does not automatically invalidate a study or disqualify a contributor. Concealing a relevant relationship prevents informed assessment and can require editorial action.

What authors disclose

Authors declare financial and non-financial interests reasonably relevant to the submitted work. These include employment, consultancy, grants, honoraria, investments, intellectual property, paid expert testimony, leadership in an organization discussed in the article, close personal or professional relationships and commitments that could directly affect the investigation. Relevant advocacy, political or organizational roles should be described without treating every scholarly viewpoint as a conflict.

For social-policy and communication research, disclosure may include funding by a platform whose users were studied, access arranged by a political or commercial organization, a consulting role connected to an evaluated policy, or an author’s position in a community being described. The statement should explain the relationship sufficiently for readers to understand it while avoiding unnecessary private detail. All authors submit individual information; the corresponding author assembles an accurate statement rather than assuming silence means no interests.

Funding and sponsor role

Every article identifies financial support and material in-kind assistance, with funder names and grant identifiers where applicable. Authors state what role the funder had in design, recruitment or access, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing and the decision to submit. If the funder had no role, that fact is stated. If no specific funding supported the research, the manuscript includes an explicit statement to that effect.

Any agreement that limits access to evidence or gives a sponsor the power to delay or prevent publication must be disclosed at submission. Editors assess whether those limits undermine independent interpretation or verification. A sponsor may check confidential proprietary details where justified, but cannot require the suppression of unfavorable findings. A paid institutional publication agreement does not count as evidence that the underlying study is independent.

Editors reviewers and corrections

Editors and reviewers disclose relevant interests before accepting a manuscript assignment and promptly if a relationship becomes apparent later. Recent close collaboration, a supervisory relationship, shared institutional responsibilities or direct competition that prevents a fair assessment normally requires recusal. Uncertainty should be discussed confidentially with the supervising editor. Reviewers do not decide whether their own conflict is immaterial without informing the journal.

An author who is an editor, board member or reviewer identifies that role at submission. An independent editor controls the manuscript, and the published declaration explains the relationship and exclusion from decision-making. Financial information supplied for a waiver is held separately from peer review. Missing or inaccurate disclosures can be corrected; a material undisclosed interest is investigated for its effect on reliability and process rather than automatically treated as proof of invalid results. Concerns may be sent to jgtsseditorialoffice@jandoopress.com or, when an editor is involved, jgtssappeals@jandoopress.com.

Last updated: 16 September 2026