NetnoCon Conference Proceedings
1.Commitment to Ethical Publishing
The NetnoCon Conference Proceedings, published by the Association for Netnographic Research, are committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, transparency, and ethical scholarship. This statement sets out the principles and practices that guide the submission, review, editorial decision-making, and publication of all contributions included in the proceedings.
The policy applies to all parties involved in the publication process—authors, reviewers, editors, conference chairs, and the publisher—and is informed by internationally recognized standards for scholarly publishing, including the principles promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and best practices expected for conference proceedings indexed in Scopus.
2.Editorial Responsibility and Independence
The Editors of the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings are the Scientific Program Chairs and bear overall responsibility for ensuring the academic quality and ethical integrity of the published volume. Editorial decisions are made independently and are based exclusively on scholarly considerations, including originality, relevance to the conference themes, methodological rigor, and clarity of contribution.
At all stages of the editorial process, care is taken to ensure fairness and impartiality. Manuscripts are evaluated without regard to authors’ personal characteristics or institutional affiliations, and no commercial, political, or personal interests are permitted to influence editorial judgment.
3.Peer Review and Quality Assurance
All submissions considered for inclusion in the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings undergo a formal, double-blind peer review process coordinated by the Scientific Program Chairs. Each contribution is evaluated by a minimum of two reviewers. Reviewers are selected for their subject-matter expertise and familiarity with relevant methodological approaches, particularly netnographic and qualitative research traditions.
The peer review process is designed to support scholarly quality through constructive and respectful evaluation. Reviewers are expected to assess submissions objectively, to provide reasoned feedback that supports editorial decision-making, and to treat all manuscripts and review materials as strictly confidential. Information obtained through peer review is not used for personal or professional advantage.
4.Responsibilities of Authors
4.1 Originality and Proper Attribution
Authors submitting to the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings are expected to present original scholarly work. Any ideas, data, text, images, or other materials drawn from existing sources must be clearly and appropriately cited. Plagiarism, in all its forms—including self-plagiarism and undisclosed reuse of previously published material—is considered a serious breach of publication ethics.
Where digital tools or artificial intelligence systems are used in the research or writing process, their use must be transparent and consistent with accepted scholarly standards. The authors are ultimately responsible for the contents of their submissions.
4.2 Multiple or Redundant Publication
Full papers submitted to the proceedings must not be under consideration elsewhere and must not have been previously published in substantially similar form. If a full paper builds upon earlier versions, such as working papers, preprints, or extended abstracts, this relationship must be clearly disclosed to the Scientific Program Chairs at the time of submission.
4.3 Authorship and Acknowledgment
Authorship should accurately reflect individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the research and its interpretation. All listed authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission. Contributions that do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately. Any proposed changes to authorship after submission require the consent of all authors and approval by the Scientific Program Chairs.
4.4 Ethical Conduct of Research
Given the focus of NetnoCon on netnographic research, authors are expected to adhere to ethical standards relating to the study of human participants, online communities, and digital data, as specified in “Netnography. The essential guide to qualitative social media research” (Kozinets, 2020). This includes respect for privacy, informed consent where applicable, protection of anonymity where necessary, and responsible handling of sensitive or vulnerable populations.
Authors should comply with institutional ethics review requirements and relevant legal or regulatory frameworks, including data protection regulations, if applicable.
4.5 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Authors are required to disclose any financial, institutional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing their research or its interpretation. Transparency in this regard supports trust in the scholarly record and allows readers to evaluate potential sources of bias.
5.Responsibilities of Reviewers
Reviewers contribute fundamentally to the integrity of the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings. They are expected to conduct reviews in a timely, fair, and constructive manner, to base their evaluations solely on scholarly merit and submissions’ potential to spark innovative and interesting debate, and to declare any conflicts of interest that could compromise their objectivity.
Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and refrain from using unpublished material for their own research or professional benefit.
6.Responsibilities of the Scientific Program Chairs
The Scientific Program Chairs are responsible for overseeing a transparent, fair, and confidential review process. They actively manage conflicts of interest, safeguard the integrity of editorial decisions, and take reasonable steps to identify and prevent publication malpractice.
Where ethical concerns arise, Scientific Program Chairs act in accordance with established ethical guidelines and ensure that concerns are handled consistently, proportionately, and with due process.
7.Publication Malpractice and Ethical Misconduct
Publication malpractice undermines scholarly trust and is treated with utmost seriousness. Examples of misconduct include, but are not limited to, plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, unethical research practices, improper authorship attribution, and undisclosed conflicts of interest.
When allegations of misconduct are raised, the Scientific Program Chairs will conduct a careful investigation guided by COPE principles. Depending on the nature and severity of the issue, responses may include requesting clarification, rejecting a manuscript, issuing corrections or retractions, or notifying relevant institutions or authorities.
8.Corrections, Retractions, and Integrity of the Scholarly Record
The NetnoCon Conference Proceedings are committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. If significant errors or ethical issues are identified after publication, the Scientific Program Chairs may issue corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern. Such notices will be clearly identified and permanently linked to the original publication.
9.Copyright and Intellectual Property
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their submissions do not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. Copyright of the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings is held by the Association for Netnographic Research, unless otherwise stated. Authors grant the publisher the right to publish, reproduce, and disseminate their work as part of the proceedings.
10.Ongoing Commitment to Ethical Scholarship
Through this policy, the NetnoCon Conference Proceedings affirm their commitment to ethical, inclusive, and responsible scholarship. All participants in the publication process share responsibility for upholding these principles and for advancing high-quality netnographic research within the global scholarly community.