Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics

The author:

  1. Submission standard: The author should present an accurate report on the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their results honestly and without  manipulation of inappropriate data. A script must contain sufficient details and references to allow others to reproduce  the search. Cheating or knowingly presenting inaccurate data is unethical and unacceptable behavior. The manuscript must follow the journal submission guidelines.
  2. Originality and Plagiarism: The author must ensure to write the original work completely. Manuscripts may not be handed over simultaneously to more than one publisher unless the editor has approved a joint publication. Previous relevant works and publications, both by other researchers and courtesy of the author, must be properly recognized and referenced. If possible, primary literature should be cited. Original words taken directly from publication by other researchers must appear in quotation marks in accordance with the standard quotation technique.
  3. Dual, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Handing over the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Some publications derived from a single research project must be clearly identified and major publications should be referred
  4. Source Recognition: The author must acknowledge all data sources used in the study by doing the quotation. Proper recognition of the work of others must always be done.

5. Article Authoring: The authoring of a research publication must accurately reflect an individual's contribution to his work and reporting. Authoring should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, implementation or interpretation of the reported research. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and approved the submitted version of the manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.

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

7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to reuse or correct the manuscript.

The Editor

  1.  Publication Decision: Based on a review report from the reviewer, the editor may accept, reject, or request modifications to the script. Validation of questionable work and importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors can be guided by the journal's editorial board policy and are limited by applicable legal requirements related to defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or 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 published articles.
  1. Script Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is first evaluated by the editor for originality and conformity to the scope of the journal. Editors must ensure the fair and prudent course of the peer review process. Editors should explain the peer review process through information for authors. Editors should run proper peer reviewers on manuscripts considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient and relevant expertise and seeking to prevent them from conflicts of interest.

3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that any manuscript received by the journal is reviewed in terms of its intellectual content regardless of the author's gender, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc.

4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that the information about the manuscript submitted by the author is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of the author's data protection and confidentiality.

5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Journal Editors will not use material not intended to be published that is disclosed in a manuscript submitted without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about scripts in which they have conflicts of interest.

The Reviewer:

1. Confidentiality: Information about the manuscript submitted by the author must be kept confidential. They may not be shown or discussed with others except as permitted by the editor.

2. Source Recognition: Reviewers must ensure that the author has recognized all the data sources used in the study. Reviewers must identify the relevant publication work referenced by the author. Reviewers should immediately notify editors if they find irregularities, potentially violate publication ethics, know substantial similarities between the manuscript and submission along with other journals or published articles, or suspect that errors may have occurred during the research or writing and submission of the manuscript.

3. Objectivity Standard: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions about the specific feedback required of them, unless there is an argumentative reason not to do so. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help writers to improve their scripts. Reviewers should clarify which additional recommended studies are important to support the claims made in the text being considered.

4. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Information or ideas specifically obtained through peer review activities must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

5. Timeliness: Reviewers must respond within a reasonable time limit in accordance with the specified policy. Reviewers only agree to review the manuscript if they are confident enough to return the results of the review within the proposed or mutually agreed deadline, and inform the journal immediately if they need an extension. In the case of the reviewer feeling it is impossible for him to complete the review of the script within the specified time then it must communicate with the editor so that the script can be sent to another reviewer.