Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Association for Computational Creativity (ACC) and the International Conference on Computational Creativity (ICCC) are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in scholarly publishing, in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This statement applies to all individuals involved in the publication process for ACC including ICCC proceedings, namely authors, editors, reviewers, and program chairs.

1. Responsibilities of Authors

Research Integrity and Originality – Authors must ensure that their submissions present honest and original work and that they have the right to submit all the material in the work for review and publication. In the case of collaborative work, submission must be approved by all co-authors.

Research Misconduct – Classical forms of plagiarism, content falsification (such as data fabrication or manipulation of visual results), or misrepresentation of results in ways that mislead or obscure the underlying data are strictly prohibited. Grey areas in the legal and ethical framework, such as questions of originality when using LLMs, are addressed separately under “Use of Generative Tools”.

Proper Attribution – All sources, references, and prior work must be appropriately cited to acknowledge the contributions of others.

Legal and Ethical Compliance – Authors must ensure that their research was conducted following all applicable laws and ethical standards in the countries and institutions where the work took place. Research should be carried out in good faith, with a commitment to contributing positively to society, human well-being, and/or a sustainable future, while minimising negative consequences, even when this contribution is achieved through critical means.

Living Participants in Research – Researchers must ensure that all studies are designed and conducted with integrity, respecting the rights, dignity, welfare, and autonomy of all living participants. All reasonable steps must be taken to minimise risks during and after the research process, and to avoid unnecessary harm to any living participants, including, where applicable, non-human living participants such as animals. This is a case of “Ethically Sensitive Work”, hence, authors are responsible for following what is described in that point.

Sensitive Data in Research – The researchers are responsible for ensuring compliance with privacy and data protection laws (such as. GDPR, and other national regulations). Further, researchers are obliged to keep the research both transparent and voluntary by informing the participants of the purpose of the experiments and that they have the right to withdraw their participation at any time. This is a case of “Ethically Sensitive Work”, hence, authors are responsible for following what is described in that point.

Ethically Sensitive Work – For ethically sensitive research – including, but not limited to, studies involving living participants, the collection of sensitive data, or military applications – or in case of ethical uncertainty, authors are encouraged to consult their institution’s ethics board before starting the practical research. Authors are also encouraged to voluntarily disclose, in their initial submission and following anonymity policies where applicable, whether an ethics review was conducted or explain why it was not required under their institutional standards. For any paper flagged as ethically sensitive, the Editors and Program Chairs may request this disclosure if it was not provided upfront, including extra details, or may request an ethics statement from the authors addressing specific questions. Final acceptability will be determined by the Program Chairs and the Publication Chair.

Responsible Use of AI – Any AI systems, tools, or methods described or developed must comply with relevant legislation, such as the EU AI Act, and must not promote or operationalise uses that are unlawful, pose an unacceptable risk, or are ethically unacceptable.

Use of Generative Tools – The use of synthetic data, LLMs, or other generative technologies in research or article production is permitted only if legally compliant, transparently disclosed, and justified. Final acceptability will be determined by the Program Chairs and the Publication Chair.

Transparency in Methodology – Authors should document all data sources, generation methods, and the role of automated tools to ensure the integrity and reproducibility of their work. They should provide a trustworthy description of the facts, allowing for the truthful assessment of conclusions and limitations.

Open Science Practices – Authors are encouraged to retain, maintain and share datasets, source code, and other supplementary materials with the reviewers (following anonymity guidelines) and the general public, where possible, unless restricted by ethical, legal, or proprietary considerations.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure – Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could influence the research or its interpretation.

Notification of Fundamental Errors – If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they are expected to promptly notify the Program Chairs and cooperate in correcting or retracting the paper as appropriate.

2. Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers

Fair and Unbiased Evaluation – Editors and reviewers must evaluate submissions fairly, objectively, and without discrimination based on authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, affiliation, or personal beliefs or any presumed characteristics in the case of blind review

Confidentiality – All submitted manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not use privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review for personal benefit or competitive advantage.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure – Reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest that could affect their objectivity and recuse themselves from the review process when necessary.

Decline Unqualified Reviews – Reviewers should decline review invitations if they feel unqualified to assess the work or cannot complete the review in a timely manner.

Flagging Sensitive or Legally Ambiguous Submissions – Reviewers are asked to flag submissions involving ethically sensitive work or legally ambiguous content. Program Chairs may request clarification from authors, such as an ethics statement, institutional review reference, or explanation of why no formal review was required. Final decisions rest with the Program Chairs and Publication Chair.

Reporting Violations of Author Responsibilities – Reviewers must promptly inform editors or Program Chairs of any suspected violation of authors’ responsibilities, such as ethical violations, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or potentially inappropriate use of Generative AI tools. Such concerns will be reviewed confidentially and addressed in accordance with COPE guidelines.

3. Peer Review Process

All papers submitted to a conference are subject to peer review by qualified experts in the field. Reviews are conducted confidentially and objectively to ensure scholarly rigour. Reviewers adhere to the official review guidelines provided by the Conference Committee.

Both reviewers and authors are responsible for following the procedures established by the Conference Committee, including those concerning anonymity, if applicable. Suspected breaches of the review process should be reported to the Program Chairs.

Reviewers and authors are also expected to engage in respectful, constructive, and professional communication that supports the development of the work and maintains a positive scholarly environment.

4. Publication Decisions

Final decisions on paper acceptance are made by the Program Chairs, based on reviewers’ recommendations and the academic merit of the submission.

5. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

Any other concerns regarding potential ethical misconduct should be reported to the ACC Publication Chair at: 📧 publications@computationalcreativity.net

All reports will be investigated in coordination with the Conference Committee (General Chair and Program Chairs), and actions will be taken in line with COPE’s procedures and flowcharts.