Publication Ethics

Job Description of Editor

1. Paper Review

The editor must ensure that the editor has evaluated each paper for originality. The editor must arrange and utilize peer review fairly and wisely. The editor must explain their peer review process as information for the author and point to the journal section reviewed by peer review. The editor must employ appropriate peer review for the paper considered for publication by selecting people with excellent expertise and avoiding conflicts of interest.

2. Publication decision

Based on the review report from the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or ask for modifications on the paper. Work validation in question and the importance for the researcher and readers should always encourage the decision. The editor can be guided by the journal editorial board policy and limited by the applicable law requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor can discuss with other editors or reviewers in making the decision.

3. Fair play

The editor must always evaluate the paper for intellectual content without considering race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author.

4. Confidentiality

The editor and editorial staff must not disclose any information concerning the paper submitted to anyone except the related author, reviewer, potential reviewer, and other editorial advisors.

5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

The editor will not use materials unpublished or undisclosed in the submitted paper for their research without informed consent from the author. The editor must not be involved in the decision on the paper in which conflict of interest is possible.

Job Description of Reviewer

1. Confidentiality

Information on the paper submitted by the author should be confidential and managed as special information. The paper must not be presented or discussed with others without informed consent from the editor.

2. Acknowledgment of Sources

The reviewer must ensure that the author has declared all data sources employed in the research. The reviewer must identify the published paper is relevant and has not been quoted by the author. Each statement that observation, derivation, or arguments have been reported previously should be equipped with a relevant quote. The reviewer must inform the journal immediately in case of deviation, having concern regarding the ethical aspect of the work, noticing substantial similarities between the paper and simultaneous submission on other published journals or papers, or expecting that violations have taken place during the research or writing and paper submission. Nevertheless, the reviewer must maintain the confidentiality of their paper and do not personally investigate further, except if the journal asks for further information or suggestions.

3. Objectivity standard

The paper review must be performed objectively, and the reviewer should disclose their viewpoint clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewer must follow the journal instructions concerning specific feedback necessary from them (unless there is a good reason for the opposite action). The reviewer must be constructive in their review and informing feedback to help the author revise their paper. The reviewer should clarify additional investigation suggested crucial to support the claim in the paper and strengthen or extend the work.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

Information or ideas acquired from peer-review should be confidential and not be used for personal gain. The reviewer must not consider a paper where conflicts of interest may arise from competition, collaboration, or other relationships or connections with any author, company, or institution related to the paper. In a double-blind review, if the reviewer suspects the author’s identity, they should inform the journal in the case of possible conflicts of interest.

5. Promptness

The reviewer must respond in a reasonable timeframe. Reviewer only agrees to review the paper if they believe they can return the review in the proposed or agreed timeframe and inform the journal immediately shall there be any extra time. If the reviewer expects not to finish the paper review in the predetermined timeframe, the information should be communicated to the editor to allow the paper to be submitted to other reviewers.

Job Description of Author

1. Reporting Standards

The author must present an accurate report on the original research and objective discussion regarding the significance. The author must present their result in honesty without data falsification or manipulation. A paper must have the detail and references to allow others to replicate the paper. A fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statement is unethical and unacceptable behavior. The paper must follow the journal submission guidelines.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

The author must ensure that they have written a completely original work. The paper must not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editor agrees. Precedent research and relevant publications, either written by other authors or the author themselves, must be properly acknowledged and referred to. The primary literature should be quoted, if possible. Original statements obtained from publications of other authors must appear in the quotation mark with appropriate quotes.

3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

In general, the author must not submit the same paper to more than one journal simultaneously. It is also expected that the author does not publish a redundant paper or a paper portraying the same research in more than one journal. Simultaneously submitting the same paper to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Various publications from one research project should be identified clearly, and the primary publication should be referred to.

4. Acknowledgement of Sources

The author must acknowledge all data sources employed in the research and quote influential publications in determining the submitted paper’s nature. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be stated.

5. Authorship of the Paper

Research publication writing should accurately reflect individual contributions to the work and report. Authorship must be limited to those providing significant contributions towards the research concept, design, implementation, or interpretation reported. Other people with significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. The author must ensure that all authors have recognized and approved the paper version submitted and their profiteering as co-authors.

6. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

All authors must clearly disclose financial or other substantive conflicts of interest in their paper that might be interpreted to affect the paper result or interpretation. All financial support sources for the project must be disclosed.

7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracy in the submitted work, the author must immediately inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or revise the paper.

8. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

The author must clearly identify in the paper if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or instruments with unusual hazards adhering in their use.