Competing Interests

ETERNAL (English, Teaching, Learning and Research) is committed to transparency, fairness, and independence in scholarly publishing. The journal recognizes that authors, reviewers, editors, and other participants in the publication process may have financial or non-financial relationships or interests that could influence, or could reasonably be perceived to influence, research, peer review, editorial decision-making, or the interpretation of published findings.

ETERNAL therefore requires relevant competing interests to be disclosed and appropriately managed throughout the publication process.

A competing interest does not necessarily mean that a person is unable to conduct research, review a manuscript, or participate in an editorial decision. Disclosure allows the journal to assess the nature and significance of the interest and, where necessary, take appropriate steps to manage it.

Transparency is the primary principle of this policy. When readers and other members of the scholarly community are aware of relevant interests, they are better able to evaluate the research and its conclusions independently.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, and other individuals involved in the publication process.

1. What Is a Competing Interest?

A competing interest exists when an individual has a relationship, responsibility, interest, or circumstance that could influence, or could reasonably be perceived to influence, their professional judgment.

Competing interests may be:

• financial;

• non-financial;

• personal;

• professional;

• institutional;

• academic;

• intellectual; or

• related to another relevant relationship or responsibility.

A competing interest may be actual, potential, or perceived.

Actual competing interest

An actual competing interest exists when a relevant relationship or interest directly affects, or is reasonably likely to affect, an individual's judgment.

Potential competing interest

A potential competing interest exists when a relationship or circumstance could develop into a conflict or could reasonably affect future judgment.

Perceived competing interest

A perceived competing interest exists when a reasonable reader, reviewer, or other informed observer could reasonably believe that an individual's judgment may be influenced, even when the individual considers themselves impartial.

ETERNAL encourages disclosure when there is reasonable uncertainty. Disclosure allows the journal to determine whether the interest requires further management.

2. Financial Competing Interests

Financial competing interests may arise when an individual has a financial relationship or potential financial benefit connected to the research, organization, product, service, intervention, or findings discussed in a manuscript.

Examples may include:

• research funding;

• grants or sponsorship;

• employment;

• consultancy;

• honoraria;

• speaker fees;

• advisory roles;

• paid expert testimony;

• ownership of shares or financial interests;

• patents or patent applications;

• royalties;

• licensing arrangements;

• commercial relationships;

• institutional financial support; or

• other financial relationships that could reasonably be perceived as relevant to the manuscript.

Authors should disclose financial interests even when they believe that the relationship did not influence the research.

3. Non-Financial Competing Interests

Competing interests are not limited to financial relationships.

Non-financial interests may include:

• personal relationships;

• professional relationships;

• institutional affiliations;

• academic competition;

• strong intellectual commitments;

• leadership positions in relevant organizations;

• membership of professional or academic associations;

• editorial positions in other journals;

• public advocacy related to the subject of the research;

• involvement in policy or regulatory activities;

• close collaboration with individuals involved in the manuscript; or

• other circumstances that could reasonably be perceived as influencing professional judgment.

Authors, reviewers, and editors should consider both direct and indirect relationships when determining whether disclosure is appropriate.

4. Academic and Intellectual Competing Interests

Academic or intellectual interests can sometimes create a potential or perceived conflict.

For example, a competing interest may arise when a reviewer:

• is conducting closely related research;

• is in direct academic competition with the authors;

• has a strong professional interest in a particular theoretical or methodological position;

• has recently published work that directly competes with the manuscript; or

• has another relationship that could reasonably affect impartial assessment.

Having expertise or a scholarly opinion does not automatically constitute a competing interest. However, where an academic relationship could reasonably compromise impartiality, disclosure or recusal may be appropriate.

5. Institutional Competing Interests

Institutional affiliation alone does not necessarily constitute a competing interest.

However, a conflict may arise when an individual's institution has a significant financial, professional, or academic interest in the outcome of the research or publication decision.

Examples may include:

• evaluating research conducted by one's own institution;

• reviewing work from a department or unit in which the reviewer has a close professional relationship;

• making an editorial decision involving one's own institution;

• reviewing a manuscript involving a close institutional collaborator; or

• participating in a decision that could directly benefit or disadvantage the individual's institution.

In such cases, ETERNAL may assign the manuscript to another qualified reviewer or editor.

6. Personal Relationships

Personal relationships may create actual or perceived competing interests.

Authors, reviewers, and editors should disclose relevant relationships such as:

• close personal relationships;

• family relationships;

• close friendships;

• significant personal disputes;

• relationships involving financial dependence; or

• other circumstances that could reasonably affect impartiality.

Reviewers should normally decline to review a manuscript when a close personal relationship with an author could compromise, or could reasonably appear to compromise, the independence of the review.

7. Competing Interests of Authors

All authors are responsible for declaring relevant competing interests at the time of submission.

Authors should consider whether they or their co-authors have any relationship or interest that could reasonably influence the research, analysis, interpretation, or presentation of findings.

Authors should disclose competing interests relating to:

• funding;

• employment;

• consultancy;

• institutional support;

• commercial relationships;

• intellectual property;

• professional relationships;

• personal relationships;

• academic competition;

• advocacy or organizational roles; and

• other relevant circumstances.

The responsibility for disclosure applies to all authors, not only the corresponding author.

The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have reviewed the competing-interest declaration and that the information provided to the journal is complete and accurate.

8. Funding and Sponsorship

Funding arrangements should be disclosed clearly.

Authors should identify relevant sources of financial or material support for the research, including:

• research grants;

• institutional funding;

• government funding;

• commercial sponsorship;

• foundation support;

• scholarships or fellowships where relevant;

• provision of materials or services; and

• other forms of substantial research support.

Where appropriate, authors should also explain the role of the funder in:

• study design;

• data collection;

• data analysis;

• interpretation;

• manuscript preparation;

• the decision to submit the manuscript; and

• the decision to publish.

If the funder had no role in these activities, authors may state this explicitly where appropriate.

9. Competing Interests of Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived competing interest before accepting a review.

Reviewers should decline an invitation when a relevant relationship could reasonably affect their ability to provide an independent assessment.

Examples may include:

• recent collaboration with one or more authors;

• current employment at the same institution;

• close personal relationships with an author;

• direct academic competition;

• significant professional disagreement;

• financial interests related to the research;

• involvement in a closely competing research project; or

• other circumstances that could reasonably affect impartiality.

Reviewers should not accept a review simply because the competing interest is not explicitly prohibited. They should consider whether a reasonable observer could question their independence.

If a reviewer is uncertain, they should disclose the circumstances to the editor and allow the editor to determine whether review is appropriate.

10. Competing Interests of Editors

Editors must manage competing interests carefully to maintain editorial independence.

An editor should not handle a manuscript when they have a significant competing interest that could influence, or could reasonably be perceived to influence, the editorial decision.

Examples may include:

• the editor is an author or co-author of the manuscript;

• the editor has recently collaborated with one or more authors;

• the manuscript concerns research conducted by the editor's own research group;

• the editor has a significant personal relationship with an author;

• the editor is in direct academic competition with the authors;

• the editor has a financial interest related to the manuscript; or

• the editor has another substantial interest that could compromise impartiality.

In such circumstances, the manuscript should be assigned to another qualified editor who can oversee the peer-review process and make the editorial decision independently.

11. Editorial Board Members

Editorial board membership does not automatically prevent an individual from submitting a manuscript to ETERNAL.

However, when an editorial board member submits a manuscript, the individual should not participate in the editorial decision concerning their own submission.

The manuscript should be handled through the journal's normal editorial procedures and, where appropriate, assigned to another editor.

The submitting editorial board member should not have access to confidential information that could provide an unfair advantage during the review process.

12. Authors Reviewing Their Own Work

Authors must not attempt to influence the peer-review process by identifying themselves to reviewers or contacting potential reviewers regarding their manuscript.

Authors should not recommend reviewers with whom they have a relationship that could reasonably compromise the independence of the review unless the relationship is transparently disclosed and the editor determines that the reviewer remains appropriate.

ETERNAL reserves the right to verify reviewer recommendations and to disregard recommendations that raise concerns about impartiality or independence.

13. Disclosure at Submission

Competing-interest information should be provided during manuscript submission.

Authors should disclose relevant interests even when they believe that the interest did not affect the research.

A declaration should be sufficiently clear to allow the editorial team to understand:

• the nature of the interest;

• the person or entity involved;

• the relationship to the research or manuscript; and

• where relevant, the period or circumstances in which the relationship existed.

Authors should update the declaration if a relevant competing interest changes during the review or publication process.

14. Disclosure in the Manuscript

Relevant competing interests should be disclosed in the manuscript.

Where no competing interests exist, authors should include a clear statement such as:

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Where a competing interest exists, authors should provide a concise and transparent description.

For example:

Competing Interests: The authors received research funding from [organization]. The funder had no role in the study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or decision to submit the manuscript.

Or:

Competing Interests: One of the authors serves as a consultant for [organization], which is relevant to the subject of this study.

The journal may request clarification when a declaration is incomplete or unclear.

15. Difference Between Funding and Competing Interests

Funding disclosure and competing-interest disclosure are related but not identical.

A funding statement identifies financial or material support received for conducting the research.

A competing-interest statement identifies relationships or circumstances that could influence, or could reasonably be perceived to influence, the research or publication process.

A study may therefore require both statements.

For example, receiving a research grant should be reported in the funding statement, while a consultancy relationship with an organization connected to the research may need to be disclosed as a competing interest.

16. Management of Competing Interests

Disclosure does not automatically prevent publication, peer review, or editorial participation.

When a competing interest is disclosed, ETERNAL will assess its relevance and significance.

Possible management measures include:

• documenting the competing interest;

• publishing an appropriate disclosure;

• assigning a different reviewer;

• assigning a different editor;

• requiring additional disclosure or clarification;

• requesting changes to the manuscript;

• monitoring the review process more closely;

• obtaining an independent assessment; or

• taking other reasonable steps to protect editorial independence.

The management approach will depend on the nature and seriousness of the competing interest.

17. When a Competing Interest Requires Recusal

In some circumstances, disclosure alone may not be sufficient.

A reviewer or editor may be required to withdraw from the process when the competing interest is sufficiently significant that impartiality cannot reasonably be assured.

Recusal may be appropriate when there is:

• a close personal relationship;

• a significant financial interest;

• direct involvement in the research;

• a substantial professional conflict;

• a serious academic competition;

• a close institutional relationship; or

• another circumstance that creates a substantial risk to independent judgment.

The purpose of recusal is to protect the integrity of the editorial process rather than to imply wrongdoing.

18. Changes to Competing Interests During Review

Competing interests may arise after a manuscript has been submitted.

Authors, reviewers, and editors should notify the journal promptly when a new relevant interest arises.

For example, a reviewer should inform the editor if they begin a collaboration with an author during the review process or become involved in research that creates a significant conflict.

Similarly, authors should update the journal if a significant financial, professional, or institutional relationship develops while their manuscript is under consideration.

19. Failure to Disclose

Failure to disclose a relevant competing interest may raise an ethical concern when the undisclosed interest could materially affect the research, peer review, or editorial process.

If an undisclosed competing interest is identified, ETERNAL may:

• request clarification from the relevant individual;

• require an updated disclosure;

• reconsider a peer-review assignment;

• reassign editorial responsibility;

• require an appropriate disclosure in the published article;

• publish a correction or editorial notice after publication; or

• take other appropriate action depending on the circumstances.

Failure to disclose does not automatically establish misconduct. The journal will consider the nature, significance, intent, and consequences of the omission.

20. Competing Interests Identified After Publication

A competing interest may sometimes become known only after an article has been published.

When this occurs, ETERNAL will assess:

• whether the interest should have been disclosed;

• whether the interest could have affected the research or interpretation;

• whether the omission materially affects the article's transparency;

• whether the published record needs clarification; and

• whether further action is necessary.

Where appropriate, the journal may publish a correction or other editorial notice identifying the relevant competing interest.

In serious cases, additional action may be considered if the undisclosed interest materially compromises the reliability or integrity of the published work.

21. Relationship to Research Integrity

A competing interest is not, by itself, evidence of research misconduct.

Researchers may have legitimate financial, professional, institutional, or academic relationships while conducting high-quality research.

The central requirement is transparency and appropriate management.

ETERNAL distinguishes between:

1. having a competing interest;

2. failing to disclose a relevant competing interest; and

3. allowing an undisclosed or unmanaged competing interest to compromise the integrity of research or publication.

These circumstances may require different responses.

22. Transparency for Readers

ETERNAL believes that relevant competing-interest information should be available to readers when it may assist them in evaluating a published article.

Where appropriate, competing-interest declarations will therefore be included in the published article.

Readers should be able to distinguish between the research findings themselves and relationships that may be relevant to interpreting those findings.

Transparency enables readers to make informed judgments about the research without assuming that the existence of a competing interest necessarily invalidates the study.

23. Confidentiality

Information concerning competing interests will be handled responsibly.

Personal or confidential information will not be disclosed unnecessarily. However, relevant competing interests may be included in the published article when disclosure is necessary for transparency.

Editors may share relevant information internally when necessary to manage a conflict appropriately.

Reviewers should not disclose confidential information about competing interests or manuscript details outside the authorized editorial process.

24. Responsibility for Disclosure

The responsibility for identifying and disclosing competing interests rests primarily with the individual who holds the relevant interest.

Authors are responsible for their own declarations and for communicating relevant information to their co-authors.

Reviewers are responsible for informing the editor of relevant interests before or during the review.

Editors are responsible for recognizing and appropriately managing their own competing interests and those identified during the editorial process.

The journal may request additional information when necessary to ensure that disclosures are complete and transparent.

25. Questions About Competing Interests

When an author, reviewer, or editor is uncertain whether a relationship constitutes a competing interest, disclosure is generally preferable to non-disclosure.

Individuals may provide the relevant information to the editorial team, which will determine whether the relationship requires further management.

The journal will assess competing interests on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the nature of the relationship, its relevance to the manuscript, its timing, and the potential effect on independent judgment.

26. Commitment to Transparency

ETERNAL considers transparent disclosure of competing interests an essential part of responsible scholarly publishing.

The purpose of this policy is not to eliminate every professional, financial, academic, or personal relationship that could potentially be relevant to research. Rather, it is to ensure that such relationships are identified, disclosed, assessed, and appropriately managed.

Through transparent disclosure and appropriate management, ETERNAL seeks to protect:

• the independence of peer review;

• the fairness of editorial decision-making;

• the credibility of published research;

• the interests of authors and reviewers;

• the transparency of scholarly communication; and

• the trust of readers and the wider academic community.

ETERNAL is committed to handling competing interests fairly, consistently, and transparently throughout the submission, peer-review, editorial, and post-publication processes.