Publication Ethics Statement

These guidelines are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. The purpose of this statement is to establish an agreed-upon standard of behavior between the parties involved in the publication of a peer-reviewed journal article (namely the author, editor, reviewer and publisher).

Duties of Authors

  • Authors shall only submit work that is original and unpublished elsewhere (in any language). Authors shall present an accurate account of their work and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data shall be represented accurately. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit replication of their work. Knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior.
  • Applicable copyright laws shall be followed. Copyrighted material should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgement. Authors shall not publish papers describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. This constitutes self-plagiarism and is not acceptable. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the research or writing. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
  • If an author discovers a significant error in her published work, it is her obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher to retract or correct the paper.

Duties of Editors

  • The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which articles are published, as guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyrights and plagiarism.
  • The editor shall not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editors, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • The editor shall evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the nature of the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnicity, citizenship, or political party.
  • Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript shall not be used in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
  • When genuine errors in published work are pointed out by readers, authors, or members of editorial board, a correction (or erratum) will be published as soon as possible. The online version of the paper may be corrected with a date of correction and a link to the printed erratum. If the error renders the work invalid, the paper should be retracted with an explanation of the reason for retraction.
  • If serious concerns are raised by readers, reviewers, or others, about the conduct, validity, or reporting of academic work, editor will initially contact the authors and allow them to respond to the concerns. If that response is unsatisfactory, the editors will take the case to the institutional level.
  • Editors will respond to allegations of research or publication misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. Cases of possible plagiarism or duplicate/redundant publication will be assessed by the journal. The editors may request an investigation by the institution or other appropriate bodies.
  • Retracted papers shall be retained online, and they will be prominently marked as a retraction in all online versions for the benefit of future readers.

Duties of Reviewers

  • The peer review process assists the editor in making editorial decisions. The peer review process also assists the author in improving the paper and preparing it for publication.
  • If a selected referee feels unqualified to review the research or knows that a prompt review will be impossible, she should excuse herself from the review process.
  • Manuscripts received for review shall be treated as confidential documents and shall not be shown to or discussed with others except as approved by the editor.
  • Reviews shall be conducted as objectively as possible. Referees shall express their views clearly with supporting arguments and refrain from personal criticism of the author.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. If the reviewer makes an editorial statement that an observation or result had been previously published, that statement should be accompanied by the relevant citation of the published work.
  • The reviewer should recuse herself from considering manuscripts in which she has a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any party connected to the paper.
  • The editors will pursue any allegation of breach of confidentiality, conflicts of interest (financial or non-financial), misuse of confidential material, or delay of the peer review for personal competitive advantage. Allegations of serious reviewer misconduct shall be taken to the institutional level.