Our journal is committed to ensuring the highest standards of academic integrity and transparency throughout all stages of the editorial process. This statement is based on the best practices of Cambridge University Press and the COPE Code of Conduct.
1. Responsibilities of the Editorial Team (Editor-in-Chief and Scientific Editors)
Monitoring publication ethics is a core aspect of the editorial and peer-review process and is the direct responsibility of the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or Scientific Editor.
- Publication Decision: Editors are responsible for deciding which submitted articles will be published based on academic quality, originality, and relevance, without discrimination regarding race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, or political ideology.
- Confidentiality: The editorial team must not disclose information regarding a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, or other editorial advisors.
- Integrity and Transparency: Editors must follow COPE guidelines to handle any suspicion of academic misconduct or authorship disputes.
2. Responsibilities of Authors
- Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. If the work or words of others are used, they must be appropriately cited. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical and unacceptable behavior.
- Multiple or Redundant Publication: Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Simultaneous submission of a manuscript to more than one journal is considered unethical behavior.
- Manuscript Authorship: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study.
- Conflicts of Interest: All authors must declare any financial or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
3. Responsibilities of Reviewers
- Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through communication with the author, may also help in improving the quality of the manuscript.
- Confidentiality and Objectivity: Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. Reviews must be conducted objectively, providing clear and constructive arguments while avoiding personal criticism.
- Conflict of Interest in Reviewing: Reviewers should not evaluate manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the work.
4. Procedures for Handling Malpractice
In accordance with international standards for database indexing, the journal will apply the following protocols in cases of suspected ethical misconduct:
- Identification of Inappropriate Conduct: Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, data fabrication, image manipulation, plagiarism, and fictitious authorship.
- Investigation: The Editor-in-Chief will initiate an investigation following COPE flowcharts. Authors will be given the opportunity to respond to any complaints or findings.
- Sanctions: If malpractice is confirmed, the journal may issue a correction, a statement of concern, or, in serious cases, proceed with the retraction of the article and notification of the authors’ institutions.
5. Commitment to Continuous Improvement
The journal is committed to regularly updating its PEMS to align with the evolving requirements of evaluation agencies and international databases. All participants in the editorial process are encouraged to consult additional resources on the official Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website. https://publicationethics.org/guidance?f%5B0%5D=type%3A21
