Publication Ethics and Malpractice
Statement
Section A: Publication and
authorship
Section B: Authors'
responsibilities
Section C: Reviewers'
responsibilities
Section D: Editors'
responsibilities
Section A: Publication and
authorship
- All submitted papers are subject to strict
peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts
in the area of the particular paper.
- The factors that are taken into account in
review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and
language.
- The possible decisions include acceptance,
acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
- If authors are encouraged to revise and
resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will
be accepted.
- Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
- The paper acceptance is constrained by
such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright
infringement and plagiarism.
- No research can be included in more than
one publication.
Section B: Authors'
responsibilities
- Authors must certify that their
manuscripts are their original work.
- Authors must certify that the manuscript
has not previously been published elsewhere.
- Authors must certify that the manuscript
is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
- Authors must participate in the peer
review process.
- Authors are obliged to provide retractions
or corrections of mistakes.
- All Authors mentioned in the paper must
have significantly contributed to the research.
- Authors must state that all data in the
paper are real and authentic.
- Authors must notify the Editors of any
conflicts of interest.
- Authors must identify all sources used in
the creation of their manuscript.
- Authors must report any errors they
discover in their published paper to the Editors.
Section C: Reviewers'
responsibilities
- Reviewers should keep all information
regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
- Reviews should be conducted objectively,
with no personal criticism of the author
- Reviewers should express their views
clearly with supporting arguments
- Reviewers should identify relevant
published work that has not been cited by the authors.
- Reviewers should also call to the Editor
in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the
manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they
have personal knowledge.
- Reviewers should not review manuscripts in
which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive,
collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors,
companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Section D: Editors'
responsibilities
- Editors have complete responsibility and
authority to reject/accept an article.
- Editors are responsible for the contents
and overall quality of the publication.
- Editors should always consider the needs
of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
- Editors should guarantee the quality of
the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
- Editors should publish errata pages or
make corrections when needed.
- Editors should have a clear picture of a
research's funding sources.
- Editors should base their decisions solely
one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to
publication's scope.
- Editors should not reverse their decisions
nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
- Editors should preserve the anonymity of
reviewers.
- Editors should ensure that all research
material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
- Edittors should only accept a paper when
reasonably certain.
- Editors should act if they suspect
misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all
reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
- Editors should not reject papers based on
suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
- Editors should not allow any conflicts of
interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.