Publication Ethics
Code of Conduct for Editors
1. Publication Decisions
The editor holds the authority to decide which submitted articles should be published. Decisions are based on the significance of each article's contribution and the recommendations of reviewers. The editor acts in accordance with the policies set by the journal's editorial board and complies with applicable legal requirements, including those concerning defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
2. Fair and Objective Evaluation
The editor evaluates manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, without discrimination on the basis of religion, ethnicity, gender, nationality, or any other personal characteristic.
3. Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and members of the editorial board.
4. Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by the editor in their own research without the express written consent of the author. Information or ideas obtained through the review process must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Editors must recuse themselves from reviewing a manuscript in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the author(s), company, or institution connected to the work.
5. Cooperation in Investigations
Editors must take responsive and appropriate action when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published article. This includes contacting the corresponding author(s) to consider the complaint and, where necessary, communicating with the relevant research institution(s). Once a complaint has been resolved, appropriate follow-up actions — such as publishing a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other notice — must be taken as needed.
Code of Conduct for Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists editors in deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript and helps authors improve their work through the editorial communication process. Peer review is an essential component of formal scientific communication and lies at the core of the scientific method.
2. Promptness
A reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript, or who knows that a timely review will not be possible, must promptly notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
3. Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be shown to or discussed with others, except as authorized by the editor.
4. Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supported by relevant arguments.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers must identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement based on prior observation, derivation, or argument must be accompanied by the corresponding citation. Reviewers must also notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published work of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal advantage. Reviewers must not review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the author(s), company, or institution connected to the work.
Code of Conduct for Authors
1. Reporting Standards
Authors must present an accurate account of the research conducted, along with an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be accurately represented in the manuscript. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
2. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data associated with a manuscript for editorial review and must be prepared to provide public access to such data where feasible, and must retain such data for a reasonable period of time following publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work, and that any use of the work and/or words of others has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication
Authors should not submit the same manuscript, or a manuscript describing essentially the same research, to more than one journal or publication simultaneously. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources
Authors must always give proper acknowledgement of the work of others. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, such as through conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without the explicit written permission of the source.
6. Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors, while those who participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included in the author list, that no inappropriate co-authors are included, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript prior to its submission for publication.
7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the research project must be disclosed.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal's editor and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article as necessary.
9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that carry unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. Where the research involves human or animal subjects, the author must ensure that the manuscript states that all procedures were carried out in accordance with relevant institutional and national ethical guidelines and regulations, and that the appropriate ethics committee approval and certificate number have been obtained, as required in the journal's Guidelines for Authors.
