Publication Ethics

  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 1113.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_field::query() should be compatible with views_handler::query($group_by = false) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 1147.
  • strict warning: Declaration of content_handler_field::element_type() should be compatible with views_handler_field::element_type($none_supported = false, $default_empty = false, $inline = false) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 229.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 587.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::query() should be compatible with views_handler::query($group_by = false) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 587.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_search::exposed_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::exposed_validate(&$form, &$form_state) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 112.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_area::query() should be compatible with views_handler::query($group_by = false) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 81.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_area_text::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 121.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 1113.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_sort::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 165.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_sort::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 165.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_sort::query() should be compatible with views_handler::query($group_by = false) in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 165.
  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/u809185268/domains/ on line 1113.

Ethical policy

Publication of an article is a formal component; it has several goals beyond straightforward communication. It is a component in the growth of a well-organized and reputable network of knowledge. It is a strong indicator of the caliber and significance of the authors' and, indirectly, the institutions' supporting research. Setting expectations for ethical behavior from all parties engaged in publishing, including the author, journal editor, peer reviewer, publisher, and society for society-owned or sponsored journals, is crucial. This includes no discrimination, harassment, bullying, or retribution and all parties treating one another with respect and dignity.

Ethical policy for authors

>Authors of reports on original research ought to give a truthful summary of the work done and an unbiased analysis of its relevance.

>The paper should appropriately depict the underlying data. A paper should have enough information and citations to let someone else duplicate the work.

>False or deliberately inaccurate statements are inappropriate and represent unethical behavior.

>For editorial review or to comply with the journal's guidelines, authors may be asked to submit the research data that supports their publication. If possible, authors should be willing to make such data accessible to the public and should be willing to keep such data on hand for a suitable period of time following publication.

>The authors should make sure that their writing is wholly unique, and if they have utilized someone else's ideas or words, they should make sure that they have quoted or cited them correctly and, if required, acquired permission.

>The study's conceptualization and design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, article drafting or critical revision for essential intellectual content, and final approval of the version to be published are all tasks that each author should have significantly contributed to.

>The corresponding author is responsible for making sure that the manuscript has all necessary co-author and no other unnecessary one and that all co-authors have seen, approved, and agreed to the paper's submission for publication.

>The work's authors accept joint liability for it. Each particular author is responsible for making sure that any concerns regarding the truthfulness or integrity of any component of the work are duly investigated and addressed.

>Plagiarism can take many different forms, including 'trying to pass another author's document as the author's own document, copying or paraphrasing significant portions of another paper without giving due credit, and claiming the findings of other people's research. Any form of plagiarism is unacceptable and is considered unethical behaviour.

>You must state who provided funding for the study's execution and/or the creation of the article, and you must briefly outline any sponsors' contributions to the study's design, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, report writing, and the decision to submit the article for publication, if any. It is advised to note this if the financing source(s) had no such engagement.

>In general, an author shouldn't submit submissions reporting essentially the same study to more than one principal journal of publication. It is unacceptable to simultaneously submit the same work to multiple journals, which is considered unethical behaviour.

>Without the author's express written consent, any information gained during the course of confidential services, such as reviewing grant applications or manuscripts, may not be used.

>The author must make it apparent in the manuscript whether the work uses any chemicals, techniques, or tools that have any unusual risks inherent in their use.

>The author should make sure the article contains a statement that all procedures were carried out in accordance with applicable laws and institutional policies and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them if the work involves the use of human or animal subjects. Informed consent for experiments involving human participants should be disclosed by the authors in the report.

>It is the responsibility of the author to promptly contact the journal editor or publisher when they find a serious error or inaccuracy in their own published work.

Ethical policy for editors

As editor, it is your responsibility to uphold and enhance the journal's standing wherever possible. You are ultimately accountable for the journal's information. In order to incorporate new research, you should make sure that the journal's objectives, scope, and content reflect any shifts in the direction of the field. In order to guarantee that the journal is strategically developed in accordance with market evolution, you will work collaboratively with the journal's publishing staff. Based on your complementary areas of expertise and knowledge sources, you and the publishing team will both offer recommendations in this regard.

>The journal's editor, who frequently collaborates with the pertinent society, is solely and independently responsible for choosing which of the articles submitted to the magazine should be published.

>Regarding matters like libel, copyright laws, and plagiarism, the editor may be led by the editorial board's policies and restrained by any applicable legal requirements at the time.

>The editor is responsible for making sure the peer review procedure is impartial, timely, and fair.

>Together with your publishing contact, selecting editorial board. In order to ensure proper, inclusive, and diverse representation, the editor must choose reviewers who have the necessary experience in the pertinent topic.

>Engage the Editorial Board in ongoing discussions about the journal's evolution, and keep them informed and include them in editorial development ideas.

>If commercial advertising, supplements, and reprint opportunities are significant revenue streams for your journal, then draw attention to them. Educate your peers and coworkers about the journal.

>Without taking into account the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophies, the editor should assess manuscripts for their intellectual merit. The editor must take suitable, inclusive, and varied representation into consideration when proposing candidates for the editorial board.

>Unless otherwise agreed with the pertinent authors and reviewers, the editor must maintain the confidentiality of all information presented to the journal and all discussions with reviewers. When it is deemed important to look into alleged research misconduct, the editor may, under extraordinary circumstances and after consulting the publisher, provide editors of other journals with a limited amount of information.

Ethical policy for Reviewer

Reviewers assess articles submitted to journals according to their specifications, predetermined standards, and the caliber, thoroughness, and precision of the research presented. They offer criticism, give suggestions for enhancements, and advise the editor on whether to approve, reject, or ask for modifications to the article. The editor is always in charge of making the final choice, but reviews are crucial to the process.

>Peer review aids the editor in editing judgments and may also help the author improve the article through editorial communications with the author. Peer review, which is at the core of the scientific method, is a crucial part of formal scholarly communication.

>Reviewers are expected to treat writers and their research with respect and to follow appropriate reviewing etiquette in addition to their unique obligations relating to ethics.

>Any manuscripts that are for review need to be handled with confidentiality. Without the editor's permission, reviewers must not divulge their opinions or data about the work to anybody or get in touch with the authors directly.

>Without the author's express written authorization, a reviewer may not use any unpublished data indicated in a submitted manuscript for their own work. Peer review's privileged knowledge or ideas must be kept secret and not utilized it for one's own benefit.

>Any major resemblance or overlapping between the manuscripts for consideration and any other material published of which the reviewer has personal knowledge should be flagged by the reviewer as something that the editor should be aware of.

>Reviews ought to be carried out impartially. When assessing a document, reviewers should be conscious of any personal prejudice they may have.

>Before consenting to review a manuscript when they have potential conflicts of interest stemming from cooperative, competitive, or other connections with any of the authors, businesses, or institutions associated with the articles, reviewers should speak with the editor.

Copyright analysis

Authors will be required to complete a Publishing Agreement if their paper is accepted. A Publishing Agreement form or the online version of this agreement will be included in an email sent to the corresponding author confirming receipt of the manuscript.

All other derivative works, including compilations and translations, as well as any sales or dissemination beyond the institution, are subject to the Publisher's prior approval. The author(s) must seek written consent from the copyright owners before including any excerpts from other works protected by copyright, and they must give due credit to the source(s) in the text.