Publication Ethics
- Duties of Authors:
1.1 Authors are required to ensure their work is original and unpublished elsewhere.
1.2 Authors must report research findings truthfully without distortion or falsification.
1.3 Proper attribution and referencing of others’ work are mandatory.
1.4 Authors must adhere to the journal’s submission guidelines.
1.5 All listed authors must have significantly contributed to the research and manuscript.
1.6 Authors must disclose any financial support that has influenced the research.
- Duties of Editors:
2.1 Editors are tasked with ensuring the published work meets the journal’s academic standards.
2.2 Decisions on article publication are based on scholarly merit, relevance, novelty, clarity, and adherence to the journal’s policy, following thorough peer review.
2.3 Editors must safeguard the confidentiality of all author and reviewer information.
2.4 Previously published articles are not accepted.
2.5 Editors must avoid conflicts of interest with authors, reviewers, colleagues within the same institution, and the administration team while ensuring that articles are not used for commercial purposes.
2.6 Editors must use reliable tools to thoroughly check for plagiarism to ensure that no published article in the journal contains plagiarized material. If plagiarism is detected during the review process before publication, editors must immediately halt all processing of the affected article and contact the corresponding author for clarification, to determine whether to “accept” or “reject” the article for publication.
2.7 Editors must uphold the journal’s standards and continuously improve its quality to ensure it remains current and relevant.
- Duties of Reviewers:
3.1 Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscript content throughout the review process and must not disclose any part of the work to third parties not involved in the review.
3.2 Reviewers should inform the editor and decline to participate in the review process if there is any conflict of interest that could affect their objective assessment, such as personal or professional relationships with the authors or involvement in the project.
3.3 Reviewers are expected to assess manuscripts based on their expertise in the field, focusing on the significance, analytical depth, and overall rigor of the work. Evaluations should be grounded in academic principles, avoiding bias based on personal opinions.
3.4 If plagiarism or significant duplication of content from other works is discovered during the review, the reviewer must report the issue immediately to the editor.
3.5 Reviewers must adhere to the review timelines set by the journal and inform the editor promptly if they are unable to meet the deadlines or need to decline the review for any reason.
3.6 Reviewers must not seek personal gain from the manuscripts they review.
