Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
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. Reviewers are being selected by Editor-in-Chief. Author also can propose reviewers for some article types.
- The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, originality, readability, validity and language.
- The possible decisions include acceptance, revisions required (minor revision), resubmit for review (major revision), resubmit elsewhere or decline submission.
- 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, whether within the same journal or in another journal.
- Authors must certify that their manuscript is their original work.
- Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere, or even submitted and been in reviewed in another journal.
- Authors must participate in the peer review process and follow the comments.
- Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
- All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research. Level of their contribution also must be defined in the “Authors’ Contributions” section of the article.
- 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.
- Authors must not use irrelevant sources that may help other researches/journals.
Peer Review/Responsibility for the Reviewers
- 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. No self-knowledge of the author(s) must affect their comments and decision.
- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
- Reviewers may 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.
- Editor have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
- Editor is responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
- Editor should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
- Editor should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
- Editor should make corrections when needed.
- Editor should have a clear picture of a research's funding sources.
- Editor should base their decisions solely one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.
- Editor should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
- Editor should preserve the anonymity of reviewers
- Editor should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to international accepted ethical guidelines.
- Editor 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.
- Editor should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
- Editor should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.
- Editor must not change their decision after submitting a decision (especially after reject or accept) unless they have a serious reason.
Publishing Ethics Issues
- All editorial members, reviewers and authors must confirm and obey aforementioned rules
- Corresponding author is the main owner of the article so she/he can withdraw the article when it is incomplete (before entering the review process or when a revision is asked for).
- Authors cannot make major changes in the article after acceptance without a serious reason.
- All editorial members and authors must publish any kind of correction honestly and completely.
- Any notes of plagiarism, fraudulent data or any other kinds of fraud must be immediately reported to the journal editor
Ethical considerations must be addressed in the materials and methods. Please state that informed consent was obtained from all human adult participants and from the parents or legal guardians of minors. Include the name of the appropriate institutional review board that approved the project. Indicate in the text that the maintenance and care of experimental animals complies with national Institutes of health guidelines for the humane use of laboratory animals, or those of your Institute or agency.
Conflicts of Interest:
Authors must acknowledge and declare any sources of funding and potential conflicting interest, such as receiving funds or fees by, or holding stocks and shares in, an organization that may profit or lose through publication of your paper. Declaring a competing interest will not lead to automatic rejection of the paper, but we would like to be made aware of it.