Publication Ethics

The journal is dedicated to preserving ethical standards at all phases of the publication process, and we advise adhering to the COPE's rules. We demand absolute adherence to the highest ethical standards on the part of the writers, editors, and reviewers. Our main goal is to work with others to educate researchers, writers, contributors, reviewers, and editors about meeting those requirements.

In order to uphold the public's confidence in the research published for the benefit of the general public and the advancement of science, we abide by all ethical norms to assure academic integrity in a responsible manner.

Authorship

A person who has produced significant academic contributions to a scientific inquiry is referred to be an author. For instance, someone who actively participates in the conceptualization, design, implementation, analysis, and interpretation of the data, reviews or revises the work for intellectual substance, and approves it for publishing.

Corresponding Author

If more than one author contributes to a research publication, at least one author should be listed as the corresponding author. The corresponding author, who may or may not be the principle investigator or project leader, accepts ultimate responsibility for the paper by making a major contribution to the research effort.

Co-authors

It is the responsibility of each coauthor to provide permission to the corresponding author of a research article to take up the responsibility of communicating with the journal. They ought to participate in the research effort, accept accountability for pertinent information, and acknowledge having read and approved the paper. They are also accountable for the accuracy of all pertinent parts of the manuscript's content, including any relevant research.

Conflict of Interest

The journal has procedures in place to handle any conflicts of interest that may arise with regard to himself, his staff, authors, reviewers, or members of the editorial board. Further to guarantee neutral review, the journal has a well-defined procedure for dealing with submissions from editors, staff, or editorial board members.

Intellectual property

In order to prevent potential violations of intellectual property laws and conventions, the editor should be aware of intellectual property concerns and coordinate with his publisher.

Best practice for the editor would include:

  1. Implementing methods for spotting plagiarism in submitted work (such as software that looks for identical titles); (either routinely or when suspicions are raised)
  2. Assisting authors who have been the targets of plagiarism CONDUCT CODE AND BEST PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS.
  3. Being willing to collaborate with the publisher to protect the rights of the authors and to pursue offenders.

Plagiarism

In order to preserve the credibility of the scientific record, the journal is dedicated to publishing unique and previously unpublished information. The corresponding author shall attest that the article has been read and approved by all other writers. Every research paper is checked for plagiarised content. If there are any signs of plagiarism in a research paper, the journal will investigate the situation and, depending on the kind of plagiarism, will take further action. Additionally, authors must confirm that the paper is not already under consideration for full or partial publication elsewhere. If a manuscript is discovered to have already been published or to be under review, processing will be halted, and authors will face consequences.

Citation Manipulation

Citation manipulation is the practise of publishing a research article mainly for the purpose of boosting an author's citation count. We highly recommend authors not to engage in such actions since this is against our ethical standards.

Sanctions

The journal will conduct an inquiry into any allegations of misconduct in accordance with the COPE standards. There will be a chance for all parties involved to express their opinions. If the complaint is legitimate, the journal will penalise the authors in line with the gravity of the violation.

In rare instances, the journal may feel compelled to edit specific works of literature. In these situations, the journal will follow the COPE retraction rules.

An erratum, or correction of an article, should be issued if:

  1. A minor section of a reputable publication turns out to be false
  2. The contributor/author list and the affiliation are incomplete

Manuscripts should be retracted if:

  1. The findings are untrustworthy, either due to malfeasance (such as data manipulation) or an honest mistake, according to clear proof the journal editors.
  2. The results have already been published elsewhere without justification, authorization, or appropriate cross-referencing.
  3. Evidences of plagiarism
  4. Evidences of unethical research

Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:

  1. They are given circumstantial proof of the authors’ misconduct in the execution of the research.
  2. Despite indications that the results are unreliable, the authors' institution has decided not to investigate the matter.
  3. They think that the investigation into suspected misbehaviour involving the manuscript has not been, or wouldn't be, fair and impartial or decisive, or that the inquiry is ongoing but that the outcome won't be known for a while.

 

Code of Conduct

All items that are accepted for publication should have through a two-review process, according to the editor. When it comes to manuscripts about which they could have a conflict of interest, the editor shouldn't make any choices. In such cases, a senior member of the Editorial Board should be designated to monitor peer review and decide whether to accept or reject a submission. The tasks should be completed exactly and on schedule for each responsibility. There should be a quick dialogue with the writers in the event of any delays. The complete procedure need to be open and adhere to a set flow. Despite the editor's ability to publish in their own magazine, a senior member of the Editorial Board will be tasked with managing the peer-review process.