We are quite aware of the fact that the reputation of ISD is highly dependent on the quality of reviews, as well as the hard and ethical work of the conference chairs, track chairs, proceedings chair and editors. We insist on all the principles defined in the AIS Research Code of Conduct – Info for Editors and Chairs. As the ISD Proceedings will be published in the AIS eLibrary, the common principles include the following:

• Fair play for everyone. Just as the peer-reviewing process must be fair, so too must the process for dealing with charges of scholarly misconduct.
• Disclosure of conflict of interest. Editors are responsible for disclosing their own conflicts of interest and finding substitutes to handle situations where they have a conflict of interest. If you were involved in accepting either the original or the plagiarized article, appoint an alternative or ask the Publications Chair to do so.
• Confidentiality. Keep identities confidential unless and until it is totally impractical to do otherwise. Be careful when consulting with colleagues that confidentiality is maintained.
• Cooperation in investigations. If another journal editor, another publisher, or any institution contacts you for help in resolving a charge of scholarly misconduct, it is your obligation to assist them in all haste.
• Swift correction of the record, if necessary. If a Track Chair or Conference Committee Chairs asks for the publication record to be corrected because scholarly misconduct has been determined, please do so in all haste. Remember that any decision to remove a paper from the digital library must come from the Conference Chair or the International Steering Committee (ISC) and should not be done just because the author requests it.
• Maintain organizational memory. The ISC will keep records of all cases of misconduct. These records will be kept in a manner that will protect the confidentiality of all parties involved. No names or other details will be divulged, unless the case requires more formal action by AIS.
• Keeping the community informed. The ISC will notify the AIS Research Conduct Committee (RCC) if scholarly misconduct has been determined. The RCC will follow its own procedures to address such notification.

Chairs, Reviewers, and Editors are permitted to use Generative AI tools for specific aspects of their work, as supporting tools. Generative AI is always observed as the third party, as a tool. However, all the reviews must be a consequence of exclusively human intellectual work, and the reviewers must guarantee this. If Generative AI has been utilized for any reviewing purpose, the reviewers are required to explicitly disclose its use and the purpose of its use in the confidential part of their reviews.