Publication ethics

Code of Ethics for Author

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and has not been previously published. They should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Plagiarism in any form is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors must properly cite and acknowledge the work of others. All sources that have been consulted and/or used in the research must be listed in the references.

Authorship and Contribution: Only individuals who have made a significant contribution to the research and manuscript should be listed as authors. All co-authors should have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Accuracy and Integrity: Authors must present their research findings accurately and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. They should provide a clear and honest account of the work performed and the significance of their research.

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Ethical Approval: Authors must provide evidence of ethical approval for research involving human participants or animals, where applicable. They should comply with institutional, national, and international research ethics guidelines.

Correction of Errors: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with them to correct the paper or retract it, if necessary.

--------------

Code of Ethics for Editors

Manuscript Evaluation: Editors are responsible for assessing the quality of submitted manuscripts, ensuring that the content aligns with the objectives and scope of the journal as stated in the journal’s guidelines. Manuscripts should be evaluated for their suitability for publication.

Originality and Duplicate Publication: Editors must verify the originality of manuscripts and ensure that authors have not previously published the work elsewhere. Manuscripts that have been previously published will not be considered.

Confidentiality: Editors must maintain confidentiality throughout the review process by employing a double-blind review method, ensuring that the identities of both authors and reviewers are not disclosed to unrelated parties during the evaluation period.

Objective Decision-Making: Editors should assess and select manuscripts based on their importance, novelty, clarity, and alignment with the journal’s policies, free from bias related to the authors' race, gender, religion, culture, political beliefs, or affiliations.

Adherence to Journal Processes: Editors must strictly follow the journal’s established processes and procedures. After the review process is complete, they must notify authors regarding the acceptance and publication timeline of their manuscripts.

Evidence-Based Evaluation: Editors should not reject manuscripts based on suspicions or uncertainty. They must seek evidence to substantiate any concerns before making decisions regarding the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest: Editors should have no involvement in manuscripts submitted for publication if they have a conflict of interest with the authors or reviewers. They must not use submitted manuscripts for their own business or academic gain.

Integrity of Manuscript Content: Editors must not alter or change the content of manuscripts or the reviewers' evaluations. They should not withhold information exchanged between reviewers and authors.

Plagiarism Handling: Editors must halt the review process immediately if plagiarism is suspected and contact the lead author for clarification. Decisions to accept or reject the manuscript should be based on maintaining the journal’s standards.

--------------

Code of Ethics for Reviewers

Expertise in Evaluation: Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts in fields where they have expertise. If the content does not match their expertise, they should inform the editor to consider finding a new reviewer. The evaluation should consider the importance of the manuscript's content to the field, the quality of the analysis, and the rigor of the work. Personal opinions without supporting evidence should not be used as criteria for evaluating the manuscript.

Confidentiality: Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of the information in the manuscript. If they cannot do so, they should inform the editor. Reviewers should not disclose any part or all of the manuscript to anyone not involved in the review process during the evaluation period.

Avoiding Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should inform the journal editor and decline to review the manuscript if they find they have a conflict of interest with the author(s), such as being a project advisor or knowing the author personally, or any other reason that prevents them from providing an independent evaluation and feedback.

References and Redundancy: If reviewers find that significant content is missing references, they should suggest relevant research that aligns with the manuscript. If they identify any part of the manuscript that resembles or overlaps with other works, they should notify the editor.

Ethics in Research: If the manuscript involves experiments on humans or animals, reviewers must check that the research methods comply with ethical standards related to human and animal research.

Timeliness: Reviewers must adhere to the review timeframe specified by the journal.