Publication Ethics

Author assignment

Article Standard: Authors must present an accurate article about the original research conducted and an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their articles honestly and without manipulation, falsification, or improper data manipulation. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts must follow the journal's submission guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written completely original work. Manuscripts may not be submitted simultaneously to more than one journal unless the editor has agreed to joint publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors themselves, must be properly acknowledged and referenced. Primary literature should be cited whenever possible. Original words taken directly from publications by other researchers must appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors may not, in general, submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Authors are also expected not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts that describe the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. The various publications that emerged from a single research project should be clearly identified, and the main publication should be referred to.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors must acknowledge all data sources used in the research and cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given.

Authorship of the Article: Authorship of a research publication must accurately reflect an individual's contribution to the work and its reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the study being reported. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors when the primary contributor is listed as an author. Conversely, those who made a less substantial or purely technical contribution to research or publication are listed in the acknowledgments section. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and approved the submitted version of the manuscript and their names as co-authors.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that could be construed to influence the outcome or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Work: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor of the journal or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the article.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: Authors must clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Editor's Task

Publishing Decision: Based on the editorial board's review report, the editor can accept, reject, or request modification of the manuscript. The validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive those decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or other reviewers in making this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the articles they publish.

Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that for originality initially evaluates each manuscript. Editors must organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should describe their peer review process in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for articles considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Fair Play: Editors must ensure that every manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for intellectual content regardless of the gender, race, religion, nationality, etc., of the author. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and impartial decisions is to uphold the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position to make decisions about publication, so it is critical that this process is fair and impartial.

Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors must critically assess potential breaches of data protection and client confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, permission for publication where applicable.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.

Reviewer Tasks

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. May not be shown or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Relevant citations must accompany any statement that the observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported. Reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they discover irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, become aware of substantial similarities between manuscripts and concurrent submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that an error may have occurred. During research or writing and submission of manuscripts; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not investigate privately further unless the journal requests further information or advice.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be carried out objectively, and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding the specific feedback required of them and unless there is a good reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback to help authors improve their manuscripts. The reviewer should clarify which additional suggested investigations are necessary to support the claims made in the text under consideration and only strengthen or expand on the work.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, cooperative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author, notify the journal if this knowledge raises a potential conflict of interest.

Accuracy: The reviewer must respond within a reasonable time frame. Reviewers only agree to review manuscripts if they are reasonably confident that they can return the review within a proposed or mutually agreed upon time frame, promptly notifying the journal if they require an extension. If the reviewer feels unable to complete the review of the manuscript within the allotted time, this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to other reviewers.