One Manuscript, One Active Review
Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal, book program, edited volume or conference proceeding at the same time.
Publication Ethics Policy
Duplicate Submission and Redundant Publication Policy
UnivColl Publications maintains this policy to protect editorial resources, reviewer time, author responsibility, copyright clarity and the reliability of the scholarly record across journals, books, edited volumes, chapters and conference proceedings.
UnivColl Publications
Academic Publisher, Scholarly Publishing House and Open Access Publisher · India
No Parallel Review
One active submission at a time
Full Disclosure
Related work must be declared
Ethical Screening
Similarity and metadata checks
Record Safety
Correction or retraction where needed
This policy does not discourage legitimate scholarly development. It requires authors to be
transparent when a manuscript is connected to a preprint, thesis, conference paper, dataset,
translation or previously published work.
Duplicate Submission
Not permitted during active review
Redundant Publication
Requires disclosure and justification
Prior Work
Must be cited and explained
Preprints
Disclose link and status
Editorial Action
Case-by-case ethical handling
Policy Purpose
Protecting Originality, Reviewer Time and Research Integrity
Duplicate submission and redundant publication can damage trust in academic publishing by misrepresenting originality, creating unnecessary peer-review work, confusing copyright ownership and distorting the published literature. This policy explains how UnivColl Publications expects authors, editors, reviewers and publishing partners to prevent and handle such cases.
Original Scholarly Contribution
Submissions should represent original work or a clearly disclosed and justified secondary version approved by the relevant editors or publisher.
Transparent Prior Disclosure
Related manuscripts, preprints, conference abstracts, thesis versions, repository records and earlier publications must be disclosed at submission.
Protection of the Scholarly Record
Where duplicate or redundant publication is confirmed, editorial action may include rejection, withdrawal, correction, expression of concern or retraction.
Scope of Policy
Applies Across the Publisher Portfolio
This policy applies to all publication formats managed, hosted, coordinated or published by UnivColl Publications. It applies before submission, during editorial review, after acceptance and after publication where evidence becomes available later.
Authors should treat disclosure as a protection, not a weakness. A disclosed preprint,
thesis chapter or conference version can often be evaluated fairly; hidden overlap creates
a publication ethics concern.
- Research articles, review papers, theoretical papers, short communications and case-based submissions
- Book chapters, edited volume chapters, monographs, textbooks and reference works
- Conference proceeding papers, special issue articles and institutional publishing projects
- Manuscripts submitted directly by authors, editors, guest editors, institutions or conference partners
- Published, accepted, under-review, withdrawn and previously disseminated scholarly content
Key Definitions
What Counts as Duplicate, Redundant or Overlapping Publication?
The following definitions guide editorial assessment. Final decisions may depend on evidence, discipline norms, copyright status, degree of overlap and author disclosure.
| Term | Meaning | Editorial Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Duplicate Submission | Submission of the same or substantially similar manuscript to more than one publication venue at the same time, without disclosure and permission. | Wastes editorial and reviewer time, creates competing publication claims and may lead to immediate rejection or withdrawal. |
| Redundant Publication | Publication of substantially overlapping content, data, analysis or conclusions already published elsewhere without clear citation, permission and editorial justification. | Distorts the scholarly record, inflates publication output and may mislead readers, databases and indexing services. |
| Overlapping Publication | A new work that shares a major portion of text, data, tables, figures, methodology, results or interpretation with another submitted, accepted or published work. | May be unacceptable unless the overlap is limited, properly cited, transparent and academically necessary. |
| Self-Plagiarism | Reuse of the author’s own previously published material without proper citation, permission or clear acknowledgement of the earlier source. | Can breach copyright, misrepresent originality and reduce trust in author declarations. |
| Salami Slicing | Dividing one substantial study into multiple small manuscripts that do not each provide a meaningful, independent scholarly contribution. | Creates fragmented literature and may be treated as redundant or unethical publication practice. |
| Acceptable Secondary Publication | A clearly disclosed translation, abridged version, policy summary, guideline republication or secondary version approved by the relevant editorial parties. | Acceptable only when permission, citation, reader transparency and copyright requirements are satisfied. |
Author Responsibilities
What Authors Must Confirm Before Submission
Every submission should be accompanied by honest author declarations. Authors are responsible for originality, related-work disclosure, permissions, co-author approval and timely updates to the editorial office.
- Submit a manuscript to only one active publication venue at a time unless formal joint publication has been approved.
- Disclose all related submissions, accepted papers, published papers, preprints, thesis chapters, conference abstracts and repository versions.
- Provide copies or links of related work when requested by the editor or publisher.
- Cite earlier work clearly when a manuscript builds on previous data, a thesis, a preprint or a conference presentation.
- Do not reuse tables, figures, text blocks, datasets, results or conclusions without permission, citation and transparent explanation.
- Do not split one study into multiple minimal papers unless each manuscript answers a distinct research question and adds substantial scholarly value.
- Ensure all co-authors understand and approve the submission status, related-publication disclosures and final author declaration.
- Inform the editorial office immediately if any related manuscript is accepted, rejected, withdrawn, posted or published during review.
Disclosure-Based Assessment
Some Related Work May Be Acceptable When Properly Disclosed
The existence of earlier material does not always mean a manuscript is unethical. The key questions are whether the relationship is disclosed, whether the new work adds value, whether readers are informed and whether copyright or editorial permissions are satisfied.
Preprints
A preprint may be considered if the author discloses the preprint link, identifies it as not peer reviewed and follows the concerned journal or publisher instructions.
Conference Abstract or Poster
A short abstract, poster or oral presentation may not prevent consideration when the full paper is substantially developed and prior dissemination is disclosed.
Thesis or Dissertation-Based Article
A manuscript derived from a thesis may be considered when the thesis source is disclosed, the article is properly adapted and the publication venue permits it.
Expanded Conference Paper
An expanded version of a conference proceeding may be considered if it contains substantial new analysis, updated references, added findings or deeper discussion and cites the earlier version.
Translation or Secondary Version
A translated or secondary version may be allowed only with editor/publisher approval, copyright clearance, clear citation and visible notice to readers.
Same Dataset, New Question
Multiple manuscripts from the same dataset may be considered when each manuscript has a distinct question, different analysis and transparent cross-reference to related work.
Not Acceptable
Practices That May Lead to Rejection or Corrective Action
The following practices may be treated as duplicate submission, redundant publication, undisclosed overlap or publication misconduct depending on the evidence and seriousness of the case.
- Submitting the same manuscript to two journals or publishers at the same time.
- Changing only the title, abstract, author order or minor wording while reusing the same core paper.
- Publishing the same data, tables or conclusions repeatedly without citation and academic justification.
- Submitting a translated version of a published article without permission and clear disclosure.
- Reusing copyrighted figures, questionnaires, tables or large text blocks without permission where permission is required.
- Dividing a single study into several papers with minimal added value merely to increase publication count.
- Withholding a related publication, preprint, thesis version or under-review manuscript from the editorial office.
- Submitting a manuscript previously rejected for ethical misconduct without disclosing the relevant history when asked.
Editorial Handling Process
How UnivColl Publications Reviews Suspected Overlap
Editors should handle potential duplicate or redundant publication concerns carefully, consistently and proportionately. The process may vary by journal, book program, discipline, stage of publication and available evidence.
Evidence-based review
Author clarification
Editorial record
Corrective action
01
Author Declaration Review
At submission, the editorial office may require authors to confirm that the work is original, not under review elsewhere and not previously published in substantially similar form.
02
Similarity and Metadata Screening
Editors may check manuscript text, title, abstract, keywords, author names, DOI details, references, repository records, preprint links and related publications.
03
Editorial Assessment
If overlap is detected, the editor may compare the submitted manuscript with related material and decide whether the overlap is acceptable, correctable or unethical.
04
Author Clarification
Authors may be asked to explain overlap, provide related documents, add citations, revise transparency statements or submit written confirmation from co-authors.
05
Decision and Record Keeping
The journal or publisher records the assessment and may reject, continue review, request revision, issue a correction, contact institutions or take post-publication action.
Possible Editorial Actions
Actions Depend on Timing, Evidence and Severity
UnivColl Publications may take different actions depending on whether the concern is discovered before review, during review, after acceptance or after publication.
| Stage | Possible Action | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Before Peer Review | Administrative rejection, request for clarification, request for related documents, or permission to resubmit after proper disclosure. | Prevent unnecessary review work and protect editorial resources. |
| During Peer Review | Pause review, ask author for explanation, consult editors, compare related documents, reject if duplicate or redundant submission is confirmed. | Protect reviewers and maintain fair editorial evaluation. |
| After Acceptance | Hold production, withdraw acceptance, request legal/copyright clarification, revise declarations or reject if serious non-disclosure is confirmed. | Prevent publication of misleading or unethical content. |
| After Publication | Correction, linked notice, expression of concern, retraction or notification to relevant parties depending on evidence and severity. | Correct the scholarly record and maintain reader trust. |
Decision Factors
What Editors May Consider in a Case
Not every overlap is equal. Editorial decisions should be proportionate and guided by transparency, evidence, reader protection, copyright requirements and the value of the new work.
The publisher does not use this policy to punish honest disclosure. It uses the policy to prevent
hidden duplication, false originality claims and avoidable damage to the scholarly record.
- Extent of text, data, table, figure, method, result or conclusion overlap
- Whether the prior work was disclosed clearly at submission
- Whether the new manuscript adds a distinct scholarly contribution
- Whether permission or copyright clearance is required and available
- Whether earlier work is a preprint, thesis, abstract, full article, book chapter or proceeding paper
- Whether readers would be misled about originality, priority or evidence strength
- Whether all authors and institutions are aware of the related publication history
- Whether correction, transparent citation or revision can reasonably resolve the issue
Before You Submit
Author Self-Check for Duplicate Submission and Overlap
Authors should complete this self-check before submitting to any UnivColl Publications journal, book chapter program, edited volume or conference proceeding.
When in doubt, disclose the related material to the editorial office. A transparent explanation
allows the editor to make a fair assessment before peer review or publication.
- Have I submitted this manuscript anywhere else at the same time?
- Have I disclosed all earlier versions, preprints, thesis chapters, conference abstracts and proceedings?
- Have I cited my related publications and explained what is new in the present manuscript?
- Are the title, abstract, tables, figures and conclusions genuinely different where related work exists?
- Have I obtained permission for reused figures, tables, questionnaires or third-party content where required?
- Have all co-authors approved this submission and confirmed the originality declaration?
- Have I provided DOI links, repository links or copies of related work when requested?
- Can a reader clearly understand the relationship between this manuscript and any prior work?
Transparency Statement
Clear Disclosure Helps Editors Make Fair Decisions
UnivColl Publications encourages authors to explain the relationship between the submitted manuscript and any related work. Editors may permit revision, citation, transparent statements or secondary publication where the scholarly purpose is legitimate and readers are not misled.
Publisher Position
No Hidden Duplication. No Artificial Publication Inflation.
The publisher expects manuscripts to make a genuine academic contribution. Submission or publication practices that hide overlap, recycle published content or create multiple records for the same intellectual work may be treated as publication ethics concerns.
Policy FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
These FAQs help authors, editors and publishing partners understand how duplicate submission, preprints, thesis-based papers, conference papers and post-publication concerns are handled.
Journal-specific instructions, book calls or conference agreements may add further requirements.
Always follow the most specific instruction provided for the concerned publication program.
Can I submit the same manuscript to two UnivColl journals at the same time?
No. A manuscript should be active with only one journal or publishing program at a time unless a formal joint publication arrangement has been approved in writing by the relevant editors or publisher.
Is a preprint treated as duplicate publication?
A disclosed preprint is not automatically treated as duplicate publication. Authors should provide the preprint link, identify it clearly and follow the concerned journal or publisher instructions.
Can I publish an article based on my thesis or dissertation?
Yes, it may be considered when the thesis source is disclosed, the article is properly adapted for publication, related content is cited and the concerned publication program permits thesis-derived work.
Can a conference paper be expanded into a journal article?
An expanded paper may be considered if the earlier conference version is disclosed and cited, and the new manuscript adds substantial scholarly value such as new analysis, deeper discussion or updated evidence.
What happens if duplicate submission is discovered after publication?
The publisher may investigate, request author explanation and take corrective action such as a correction, linked notice, expression of concern or retraction depending on the evidence and seriousness of the case.
Can I reuse my own text from a previous article?
Limited reuse may be acceptable in some technical or methodological contexts, but substantial reuse must be cited, justified and disclosed. Reuse that misrepresents originality may be treated as self-plagiarism or redundant publication.
Policy Pathway
Related Policies, Author Actions and Trust Pages
This policy is connected with UnivColl Publications' wider publishing ecosystem, including author guidance, editorial independence, publication ethics, metadata readiness and official support routes. Use the related links to move to the next practical step without relying on disconnected or informal information.
Publication Integrity
Open related page
Publication Malpractice Report
Open related page
Complaints and Appeals
Open related page
Contact Publisher
Open related page
Policies and Guidelines
Open related page
Publication Ethics
Open related page
Peer Review Policy
Open related page
Submit Manuscript
Open related page
Transparency and Responsible Publishing
Policy Use Does Not Create Publication or Indexing Guarantees
UnivColl Publications uses policy pages to support transparent communication, fair editorial handling, author awareness and scholarly record integrity. Submission, payment, policy compliance or support communication must not be treated as a promise of acceptance, indexing, citation, ranking or any third-party database outcome.
Publication Ethics
Editorial and publication decisions should remain evidence-based, policy-led and independent.
No Guaranteed Acceptance
Acceptance depends on scope, originality, review suitability, ethical compliance and editorial decision.
Metadata Ready
Published records may be supported with structured metadata, DOI references and correction workflows where applicable.
Documented Support
Queries should include manuscript ID, DOI, transaction reference or policy concern details where available.