Authors must ensure their articles are original and uphold high standards of scientific integrity. The opinions expressed in published or presented articles do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editorial Board or the BRAMS Institute. As an open-minded think tank, we encourage authors to explore ideas, but this freedom requires strict adherence to common sense and scientific integrity. Failure to meet these expectations will be taken seriously.

No article will be considered for publication if it is simultaneously under consideration by another publication, has been published or is scheduled for publication elsewhere, or has been uploaded online. This policy is absolute and non-negotiable.

Exceptions to the CC-BY license are at the discretion of the editorial office and will only be granted under reasonable extenuating circumstances. To request an exception, authors must submit a formal justification. This request must be approved in writing by the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. In the absence of such written approval, the CC-BY license will apply to all published works without exception.

Authors may enter into separate contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of their published work, provided they acknowledge its initial publication in the BRAMS Journal.

Authors can post their work online in institutional repositories or on their own websites. All pre-print versions must include a citation and a link to the final published version in the BRAMS Journal as soon as the issue becomes available. Post-print versions, including the final publisher’s PDF, must also include a citation and a link to the journal’s web page. Compliance with these posting instructions is mandatory.

Before publication, authors can withdraw their manuscript at any time, without a refund if the APC payment has been made.

 

Peer Review Policy

BRAMS employs a double-blind peer review system, ensuring that reviewers are unaware of authors' identities, and vice versa. This method promotes fairness and minimises bias.

All submissions undergo an initial evaluation to assess their relevance, formatting requirements, and compliance with originality and ethical standards using tools such as iThenticate (Turnitin). If a manuscript passes this check, it is sent to two qualified experts in the field and one PhD holder from a different discipline for additional insight. Reviewers evaluate the originality of the work, the robustness of the methods, the clarity and organisation of the paper, its alignment with the journal's goals, and the relevance and completeness of references.

Manuscripts may be accepted as submitted, accepted with minor changes, accepted with major changes, or rejected. Authors receive a decision email along with reviewer feedback. If revisions are necessary, authors must either agree to resubmit the revised paper or withdraw their publication request. In cases requiring substantial revisions, revised papers will be returned to the reviewers for final assessment.

All authors whose manuscripts have undergone peer review must revise their papers according to the comments provided by the reviewers and editors. Once a manuscript is accepted, an email notification will be sent to the author(s). After payment of the manuscript preparation fee, two subeditors will edit and proofread the text before it is sent to the technical editor. Following these stages, the article will be published in its initial online edition, and the author(s) will be notified. Once the issue is finalised, all articles will be published in their final form, and authors will receive an email notification.

 

Editing Policy

The manuscript will undergo a copy-editing and technical editing process after acceptance, during which it may be revised or refined to meet academic style standards. This process includes:

• Proofreading: Corrections for grammatical errors, punctuation, and adherence to the journal's style guidelines. This involves:
  • Identifying and correcting spelling mistakes.
  • Ensuring proper word usage and syntax.
  • Checking consistency in terms, abbreviations, and formatting.
  • Reviewing citations and references for accuracy and formatting compliance.
• Content Review: Enhancements to improve the clarity, coherence, and organisation of the text, making it more accessible to a wider audience.
  • Improving the overall structure and flow of arguments.
  • Ensuring logical progression of ideas throughout the manuscript.
  • Providing suggestions for rephrasing complex or unclear sections.
  • Assessing the appropriateness of examples and anecdotes to support the content.
• Substantive Editing: A thorough examination of the manuscript's structure and content, focusing on clarity and overall effectiveness.
  • Assessing the strength and logic of the arguments presented.
  • Ensuring that claims are supported by appropriate and sufficient evidence.
  • Checking for thematic consistency throughout the manuscript.
  • Evaluating how well the content engages the intended audience and adjusting the tone as needed.
  • Improving transitions between sections and paragraphs for better flow.
  • Ensuring that objectives and conclusions are clearly stated and aligned with the content.
• Formatting Adjustments: Ensuring that the article meets the journal's formatting requirements.
  • Reviewing layout, headings, and subheadings to ensure uniformity.
  • Ensuring proper use of fonts, spacing, and margins in accordance with journal guidelines.
  • Formatting tables and figures correctly, including captions and labels.
  • Verifying that all sections of the manuscript are present and in the appropriate order according to submission guidelines.

Authors should be mindful of the following:

• Timeframe: The editing process may take several weeks, depending on the complexity of the manuscript.
• Responsibilities: Authors may be required to review and approve edits, especially if substantial changes are suggested that could alter the manuscript's meaning. It is essential for authors to actively engage in this process to ensure that the final version accurately reflects their intent and scholarly contributions. Communication with the editorial team may be necessary to clarify any questions or concerns regarding the edits.

Authors should strive for high-quality submissions to avoid delays at any stage of the lengthy process from submission to publication. Submitting a high-quality manuscript is the best guarantee for having your article published sooner and for avoiding delays in the publication of other authors' manuscripts scheduled in the same issue. Let's respect each other and be aware of these timelines.

 

Copyright Policy

All authors must accept the following copyright terms for publication in the BRAMS Journal: First publication rights to original works are irrevocably granted to the BRAMS academic journal. Copyright remains with the author(s). Refusal to accept or comply with these terms will lead to immediate rejection of the manuscript, without exception. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory.

All works published in the BRAMS Journal will be distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY). Authors retain copyright ownership but grant permission for others to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute, and copy their work, provided the original source and author(s) are cited correctly. A complete bibliographic citation and a link to the BRAMS Journal web page are mandatory. No additional permission is required from authors or publishers for such use. All reuse or redistribution must explicitly reference the original CC-BY license terms for compliance.

 

Plagiarism Policy

The BRAMS Journal upholds a zero-tolerance policy towards plagiarism. All submitted manuscripts undergo a thorough similarity check using iThenticate (Turnitin) software to detect text similarity and potential plagiarism. Authors are strongly advised to conduct their own plagiarism checks prior to submission to avoid rejection or ethical issues. Accurate citation and quotation are essential when referencing or paraphrasing the work of other scholars.

If plagiarism is identified at any stage, the article will be immediately rejected and will not be considered for resubmission. In cases of published work found to contain plagiarism post-publication, BRAMS reserves the right to retract the article and prohibit the author(s) from submitting future work.

If you suspect that your work has been plagiarised in any BRAMS publication, please notify us with verifiable evidence. We are committed to taking prompt corrective action to address such issues. For queries or complaints related to plagiarism, contact us directly at bramsinstitute@gmail.com.

 

AI Policy

The bilingual academic journal BRAMS, published by a digitally-driven think tank with an international team, recognises the potential of generative AI tools to enhance idea generation, assist authors in articulating content in non-native languages, and accelerate research processes. While we acknowledge that large language models (LLMs) can improve efficiency, we emphasise the need for responsible usage, ensuring compliance with high standards of data security, confidentiality, and copyright protection.

Despite their capabilities, generative AI cannot replicate human creativity and critical thinking. Several risks must be considered:

1. Generative AI may produce inaccuracies or biases that are difficult to detect.
2. These tools often fail to meet scholarly norms for proper attribution of ideas, quotes, or citations.
3. Many operate on third-party platforms lacking sufficient confidentiality, data security, and copyright protection.
4. Providers may reuse user data, potentially infringing on the rights of authors and publishers.

To uphold ethical conduct, transparency, and scholarly integrity, BRAMS Journal has established an artificial intelligence policy for the appropriate use of AI-assisted technologies, guided by best practices, including those from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

For Authors

Authors preparing a manuscript for the BRAMS Journal may use AI tools; however, these tools cannot replace human critical thinking, expertise, and evaluation. Therefore, they must always operate under human oversight. While AI can assist in various aspects of manuscript development, the ultimate responsibility for the content rests with the author(s).

Authors are not required to disclose the use of assistive AI tools that enhance language, grammar, or structure. They must meticulously review, edit, and validate any AI-generated material to ensure factual accuracy, originality, and compliance with ethical research practices since authors are accountable for any errors, misrepresentations, or ethical breaches related to AI technologies in their manuscripts.

The BRAMS Journal has a zero-tolerance policy concerning the misuse of AI. Authors must adhere to approved uses of genAI in research publishing and disclose any applications during the manuscript preparation process. This includes writing or editing text, translating content, generating images or figures, analysing data, suggesting references, assisting with literature reviews, using AI-generated software or code for research, visualising data, creating illustrations or infographics, and checking code for errors using AI assistance. All uses must be documented in a dedicated section of the manuscript, such as the Methods section. For example: "The author(s) used OpenAI’s ChatGPT to edit and refine the Introduction. All outputs were reviewed and verified by the author(s)."

AI tools should not be listed as authors or co-authors, nor should they be referenced as such in the manuscript. Authorship requires the ability to make meaningful intellectual contributions, accept accountability for the work, and uphold ethical standards. Since generative AI tools—such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, NovelAI, Jasper AI, DALL-E, Midjourney, and Runway—lack human agency, they cannot fulfil human responsibilities and must not be credited as author(s).

Reviewers suspecting inappropriate or undisclosed use of generative AI in a submission should flag their concerns with the journal editor. If editors suspect the use of genAI in a submitted manuscript or review, they should consider this policy during their editorial assessment or contact the BRAMS representative for guidance.

Any suspicion of misuse may be subject to editorial investigations. If misconduct is discovered—whether before or after publication—the manuscript will be rejected or retracted, and appropriate ethical and legal actions will be taken. The journal editors and editorial board members will lead investigations into concerns regarding the inappropriate use of generative AI in published articles, following guidance from COPE and our internal policy.

For Editors and Peer Reviewers

Editors and peer reviewers are not required to disclose the use of assistive AI tools that enhance language, grammar, or structure, but they are responsible for ensuring the accuracy of their submissions.

Editors and peer reviewers must not upload a submitted manuscript, or any part of it, into a genAI tool, as this may violate authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights. Failure to comply may infringe upon the rightsholder’s intellectual property. If the manuscript contains personally identifiable information, doing so could breach data privacy rights.

Editors must maintain confidentiality regarding submission and peer review details.

Peer reviewers may not use genAI tools to draft or edit manuscript reviews without explicit permission from the editor. When such permission is granted, reviewers must ensure the manuscript's confidentiality is fully protected. They should not upload their peer review reports into AI tools, even for language enhancement. They are expected to take full responsibility for their reviews, regardless of whether AI assistance is used.

While generative AI may assist in improving the language of reviews, peer reviewers bear full responsibility for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of their assessments. Those who inappropriately use generative AI tools to generate review reports will be barred from future invitations to review for the journal, and their reviews will not be considered in the final decision.

The journal and publisher reserve the right to take action if editors and peer reviewers breach confidentiality by using generative AI tools.

 

Publication Ethics

The BRAMS Journal is dedicated to promoting ethical practices in research publication. We are committed to ensuring the permanent and open availability of published works, fostering transparency and accountability through our digital archive and partnerships with libraries and repositories.

Confidentiality is paramount; manuscript details are disclosed only to those peer reviewers and editors directly involved in the review and publication processes.

All submitted manuscripts undergo rigorous peer review by at least three experts, who are expected to provide objective evaluations. Personal bias and conflicts of interest are strictly prohibited. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality regarding unpublished material encountered during the review process.

Authors are required to disclose any conflicts of interest and acknowledge sources of financial support. Ethical considerations for research involving animals or human participants must comply with applicable laws and regulations.

The editorial board, in collaboration with the publisher, will address any ethical concerns raised regarding submitted or published manuscripts. Appropriate measures, such as corrections or retractions, will be implemented for any confirmed instances of research misconduct.