{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020016012810248198, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.964200477326969, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Journal ethics: Ethos, policy and practice

Ethics has been on the agenda of social work and academic research for a long time. In addition to many studies, textbooks and professional guidelines, there are entire journals on ethics. Further, we have experienced the expansion of ethics committees and different kinds of evaluation practices of (research) ethics even to the extent that some scholars talk, rather critically, about the new forms of research governance through ethics. However, what seems to be left out of this discussion is the ethics of journals. Indeed, one can be of two minds whether any further discussion about journal ethics is needed at all. As a new journal, Nordic Social Work Research has, in its first year, experienced vividly that ethics is a crucial issue in the editorial and publishing practice. Ethics go far beyond what is said in the instructions for authors in which we ask the authors to follow the ethical guidelines concerning research on human beings. It is essential that those guidelines are followed and plagiarism and double-publishing are avoided. We trust that the researchers will follow such rules without the journal instructing them to do so. It is, after all, every researcher’s responsibility (and right) to conduct ethically sound research. In the field of social work, doing ethically sound research is, however, sometimes far from being a straightforward exercise as many current analyses demonstrate. The more sensitive the issues and vulnerable groups one studies, the more complex the ethical issues are. Different issues do turn up when submitting papers and assessing – and receiving assessments about – their quality and suitability for an academic journal. Research and researchers are targeted by assessments from the moment of presenting a research proposal to the publishing of research results. I imagine that many researchers can recall the experiences of receiving reviews which are encouraging as well as ones which seem to be unfair, sometimes even impolite and rude. Feedback is most difficult to accept if the reviewers have given their criticism to demonstrate the strength of their own frame and the weaknesses and faults of the paper. It is, I assume, a feeling of being powerless and numb, being subordinated to the anonymous reviewers, and then the editor following their suggestions. Although unpleasant experiences do not take us to the issue of journal ethics, the use of power and experiences of misuse of power do.