Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

This statement follows the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and adheres to internationally accepted standards of ethical conduct for scholarly publishing.

1. Introduction

1.1. Publishing in peer-reviewed academic journals serves purposes beyond communication; it establishes scholarly credibility and accountability. Therefore, ethical standards must be upheld by all participants in the publishing process—authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers.

1.2. The publisher plays a key role in supporting academic communication and is responsible for ensuring adherence to best practices in ethical publishing.

1.3. Upholding the integrity of the academic record is a fundamental responsibility of the publisher.

2. Responsibilities of the Publisher

2.1. The publisher is expected to implement policies that assist editors, reviewers, and authors in fulfilling their ethical responsibilities.

2.2. Editorial decisions must remain independent of commercial interests, such as advertising or reprint income.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

3.1. Editorial Decisions
Editors hold sole responsibility for deciding which submitted manuscripts should be published, based on the manuscript’s scholarly value and its importance to the field.

3.2. Fair Evaluation
3.2.1. Manuscripts must be assessed based on academic merit, without discrimination based on race, gender, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political beliefs.
3.2.2. Editors must ensure a fair, timely, and unbiased peer-review process and avoid assigning unqualified or fraudulent reviewers. Conflicts of interest and inappropriate citations suggested by reviewers must be carefully reviewed.

3.3. Confidentiality
Information regarding submitted manuscripts must only be shared with those directly involved in the review and publication process. The identity of reviewers must be protected unless an open review model is used with mutual consent.

3.4. Conflict of Interest
3.4.1. Editors must not use unpublished data from submissions for their research without written consent.
3.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest.

3.5. Correction of Published Errors
If an editor becomes aware of significant errors in a published work, they must coordinate with the publisher to issue a correction, retraction, or notice as appropriate.

3.6. Investigation of Misconduct
Editors must cooperate with publishers and relevant institutions when ethical concerns or complaints arise regarding submitted or published content.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

4.1. Editorial Support
Peer review supports the editor’s decision-making and helps authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should treat authors and their work with fairness and respect.

4.2. Timeliness
Reviewers who cannot complete a review in a timely manner or lack the expertise to assess a manuscript should promptly notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

4.3. Confidentiality
Manuscripts must be treated as confidential and not shared or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

4.4. Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively and respectfully, providing clear, evidence-based comments without personal criticism.

4.5. Source Acknowledgment
Reviewers should point out any overlooked citations or previously published work. They should alert editors to potential ethical issues, including plagiarism or duplicate submissions.

4.6. Conflict of Interest
4.6.1. Reviewers must not use unpublished data for personal research or advantage without consent.
4.6.2. Reviewers should decline to review manuscripts where there are potential conflicts of interest with authors or institutions.

5. Responsibilities of Authors

5.1. Reporting Standards
5.1.1. Authors must present accurate and complete accounts of their research. Data and references must be provided to support reproducibility. Misrepresentation is unethical.
5.1.2. Review articles and opinion pieces must be clearly identified and written objectively.

5.2. Data Availability
Authors should be ready to provide raw data for editorial evaluation and, if necessary, for public access, and retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.

5.3. Originality and Plagiarism
5.3.1. Authors must ensure their work is original and properly cite any external sources.
5.3.2. Plagiarism in any form—including copying, paraphrasing without citation, or claiming others' results—is unethical and unacceptable.

5.4. Multiple or Redundant Submissions
5.4.1. Authors should not submit the same work to more than one journal.
5.4.2. Previously published papers should not be resubmitted elsewhere.
5.4.3. In some cases, secondary publication (e.g., translations) may be allowed with the proper acknowledgment and consent of all involved parties.

5.5. Source Acknowledgment
All references and influential contributions must be properly cited. Personal communications or unpublished data should not be used without permission.

5.6. Authorship Criteria
5.6.1. Only those who made significant contributions to the research should be listed as authors. Others who contributed to specific aspects may be acknowledged.
5.6.2. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring all co-authors approve the final manuscript and agree to its submission.

5.7. Conflict of Interest Disclosure
5.7.1. Authors must disclose any financial or personal conflicts of interest that might influence their research.
5.7.2. Examples include funding sources, employment, consultancy, stock ownership, and patent interests.

5.8. Correcting Published Errors
When an author discovers a significant error in their published work, they must immediately inform the editor and cooperate in issuing a correction or retraction. If such an error is reported by others, the author must also assist in resolving the issue.