Editorial Policies
Editorial independence, review discipline and publication integrity.
The Journal’s editorial framework is designed to ensure that scholarly decisions are made transparently, consistently and independently of commercial or institutional influence.
The credibility of a scholarly journal depends not only on what it publishes, but on the integrity of the process by which publication decisions are made.
1. Editorial Independence
The Journal maintains a clear separation between publishing functions and editorial decision-making. Invisible Architecture Press provides the publishing infrastructure, but decisions concerning individual manuscripts are based solely on scholarly merit, relevance, rigour, integrity and contribution to the Journal’s intellectual field.
No commercial, institutional or personal relationship may confer editorial advantage.
2. Peer Review
Substantive scholarly contributions are evaluated through independent peer review appropriate to the nature of the manuscript.
Reviewers are selected for relevant expertise and are expected to provide rigorous, fair, constructive and confidential assessments. Editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the authorised editor and are not determined by reviewer recommendation alone.
3. Conflicts of Interest
Editors, reviewers and authors must disclose relationships or circumstances that could reasonably affect, or appear to affect, impartial scholarly judgment.
Anyone with a material conflict must be excluded from the relevant editorial process.
Where an author is associated with Invisible Architecture Press or the Journal’s editorial structure, that author must have no involvement in reviewer selection, review management or the final publication decision concerning their own work.
4. Research Integrity
The Journal requires honesty, accuracy, methodological transparency and responsible scholarly conduct.
Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, undisclosed duplicate publication, inappropriate manipulation of citations, deliberate misrepresentation of evidence and other forms of research misconduct are incompatible with publication in the Journal.
Concerns regarding research integrity may be investigated before or after publication.
5. Authorship and Contributions
Authorship must reflect substantive intellectual responsibility for the work.
All listed authors must have made a meaningful contribution, approved the submitted version and accepted responsibility for the integrity of their contribution.
Individuals who contributed without meeting the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged appropriately.
6. Corrections, Expressions of Concern and Retractions
The scholarly record must remain accurate after publication.
Where significant errors or integrity concerns are identified, the Journal may issue a correction, publisher or editorial notice, expression of concern or retraction, depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue.
Post-publication actions will remain permanently linked to the original scholarly record.
7. Complaints and Appeals
Authors and other affected parties may raise concerns regarding editorial procedure or appeal an editorial decision where there are substantive grounds to believe that relevant evidence, procedure or policy was materially overlooked.
An appeal is not a second opportunity to obtain a different scholarly opinion.
Complaints and appeals must be considered by individuals who were not compromised by the matter under review.
8. Artificial Intelligence and Computational Tools
Authors must remain accountable for every part of a submitted manuscript, including material produced or substantially assisted by artificial intelligence or other computational systems.
AI systems cannot qualify as authors.
Material use of AI in research, analysis, drafting, data processing or other scholarly functions must be disclosed where such use is relevant to understanding, evaluating or reproducing the work.
The Journal will establish separate safeguards governing the use of AI by reviewers and editors where manuscript confidentiality is involved.
9. Data, Sources and Research Materials
Authors are expected to describe the evidential basis of their work accurately and, where appropriate and legally permissible, provide sufficient information for readers to understand how conclusions were reached.
Data availability, source provenance, methodological transparency and access to supporting materials may form part of editorial assessment.
Exceptions may apply where confidentiality, privacy, security, contractual obligations or legitimate institutional restrictions prevent disclosure.
10. Policy Governance and Updates
The Journal’s editorial policies form part of its scholarly governance framework and may be revised as the Journal develops, publishing standards evolve or new forms of institutional and technological risk emerge.
Material policy changes will be dated and publicly recorded.
The governing principle remains constant:
Editorial authority exists to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, not the interests of the publisher, authors, reviewers or editors.
Editorial Framework
The principles above define the Journal’s editorial foundation. Detailed policies governing peer review, conflicts of interest, research integrity, authorship, corrections and retractions, complaints and appeals, artificial intelligence, and research data will be published as the Journal’s editorial framework develops.
All policies will be publicly accessible, versioned and subject to transparent revision.