Publication Ethics

The journal and its editorial board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles stated here.

 

Part 1. Editors Responsibilities

Editors play a crucial role in ensuring the integrity, fairness, and quality of the manuscript publication's process. They are responsible for making publication decisions based on reviewer recommendations while adhering to ethical and legal standards, including those related to plagiarism and copyright. Confidentiality is strictly maintained throughout the review process, and conflicts of interest are carefully managed to ensure transparency, particularly regarding funding disclosures. Editors uphold fairness in author relations by implementing clear submission policies and fostering an unbiased peer review process. They also work closely with reviewers, encouraging them to address ethical concerns and maintain high standards of professionalism. Furthermore, editors are committed to quality assurance, ensuring that published research meets ethical guidelines and addressing any errors or inaccuracies to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

 

Part 2. Reviewers Responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decisions

Reviewers play a crucial role in aiding the editorial board in making editorial decisions. It is essential that reviews are conducted objectively, and observations are expressed clearly with supporting arguments. The primary aim is to provide constructive feedback that authors can utilize to enhance the quality of their paper. Personal criticism of the author is deemed inappropriate in the review process. The focus should be on the content and improvement of the manuscript, fostering a constructive and professional environment for scholarly evaluation.

 

Qualification of reviewers

Selected referees who feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or anticipate that prompt review will be challenging should promptly notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process. It is essential that reviewers refrain from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers. Maintaining objectivity and avoiding conflicts of interest is crucial to ensuring the integrity and fairness of the peer review process.

 

Confidentiality

All manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are obligated to maintain the confidentiality of privileged information or ideas obtained through the peer review process. Such information should not be used for personal advantage, and reviewers should refrain from disclosing details of the manuscript or utilizing the content for any personal gain. Upholding the confidentiality of the peer review process is essential for preserving the integrity and trustworthiness of scholarly evaluation.

 

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers are expected to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. References to the ideas of others should be accompanied by the appropriate citation. Additionally, reviewers should bring to the editor's attention any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. This proactive approach helps ensure that proper credit is given to prior work and that any potential issues of similarity or overlap are addressed transparently during the peer review process.

 

Part 3. Authors Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Authors reporting original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and provide an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. Authors should be ready to grant public access to raw data related to the paper and retain such data for a minimum of two years after publication. Making fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements is considered unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

 

Originality, Plagiarism, and Concurrent Publication

Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original, and proper acknowledgment is given to the work and/or words of others. Plagiarism in any form is considered unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting essentially the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is also deemed unethical and unacceptable.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors are required to disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could be perceived to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

 

Authorship of the Paper

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included in the paper, and no inappropriate co-authors are listed. All co-authors should have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. Significant contributors should be listed as co-authors, while others who participated in specific substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

 

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, they are obligated to promptly notify the journal editor and collaborate to retract or correct the paper.

 

Part 4. Peer Review Process

All manuscripts undergo peer review and are expected to meet academic excellence standards. Submissions approved by the editor are considered by two independent peer reviewers, and the identities of reviewers remain anonymous (single-blind peer review). The decision on acceptance or rejection is the responsibility of the editorial board, based on the recommendations of the peer reviewers.

The Research Integrity team may seek advice outside standard peer review for submissions with significant ethical, security, biosecurity, or societal implications. Consultation with experts and academic editors may be sought before deciding on appropriate actions, including recruiting reviewers with specific expertise, additional editorial assessments, or declining further consideration of submission.