AusArt publishes peer-reviewed research articles, which implies the ethical commitment of all parties involved:

• Authors submitting proposals to AusArt must ensure that their manuscripts are unpublished and original, and that they have cited and referenced in a standardised way (Chicago author-year format) the work of others. Only those who have made significant contributions will be listed as authors, under the responsibility of the submitter of the manuscript. Co-authorship: up to 3 authors will be attributed equal responsibility, regardless of the order in which they appear. It is suggested to mention the rest in "Acknowledgements" or by specifying the role of each contribution using the CRediT taxonomy (Contributor Roles Taxonomy). Where appropriate, the source of research funding behind the published article should be made explicit: funding agencies and project code.
• The reviewers will treat the assigned manuscripts as confidential documents, and will methodically and rigorously argue their decisions in the review forms that will be sent to the authors. They must declare to the editor any conflicts of interest or inabilities, including not feeling sufficiently qualified to carry out the review.
• The editors are responsible for the final editorial decision (publication or non-publication of the reviewed manuscripts). They will guarantee objective dialogue between the parties involved in the editorial process, and will ensure the confidentiality of the manuscript proposals received, ensuring the scientific rigour of the entire process.

For all its editorial and management processes, AusArt adheres to the standards, codes of ethics and practice guidelines established by COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).

• Allegations of misconduct
• Authorship and contributorship
• Complaints and appeals
• Data and reproducibility
• Ethical oversight
• Intellectual property
• Journal management
• Peer review processes
• Post-publication discussions and corrections