Publication Ethics

Academic Journals require all authors to adhere to the ethical standards as prescribed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Regarding Article Publication Decisions: The editor is responsible for deciding which articles are suitable for processing and submission to the journal for publication. Editors are guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and are limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor can negotiate with the editorial team or other reviewers in making decisions regarding this matter.

Context Fairness: Editors always evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff may not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted article may not be used in the editor's own research without written permission from the author.

Responsibility of Reviewer:

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Review of articles by reviewers helps the editor in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with the author can also help the author in improving the paper.
  2. Regarding review timing: any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that prompt review is not possible should notify the editor and request permission from the review process.
  3. Regarding confidentiality: any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. The document may not be shown or discussed with others except with the permission of the editor.
  4. Objectivity Standard: the review must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is considered inappropriate and is not permitted according to applicable ethics. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  5. Source Acknowledgment: reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument has been reported previously should be accompanied by relevant citations. A reviewer should also draw the editor's attention if there are substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published articles of which they are personally aware.
  6. 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 that have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the paper.

Responsibility of Author:

  1. Regarding reporting standards: authors of original research articles must provide an accurate report of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be presented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript must contain detailed information and sufficient references (rule: maximum of the last 10 years) to enable others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable behaviour.
  2. Regarding Originality and Plagiarism: authors must ensure that they have written an entirely original work, and that if the author has used the work and/or words of others that the work has been properly cited or quoted.
  3. Regarding Multiple, Excessive, or Simultaneous Publications: an author generally may not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
  4. Source Acknowledgment - related to citation: appropriate recognition of other people's work must always be given and demonstrated by an appropriate citation or citing process. Authors should cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported.
  5. Articles: Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research being reported. All parties who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. If others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
  6. Concerning the Corresponding Author: The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors are appropriate, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and approved its submission for publication.
  7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: all authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Regarding fundamental errors in published work: when an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in published work, the author is obliged to immediately inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.