|Editorial Advisory Board|
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Duties of Editors
Confidentiality— Editors of the journal must treat received manuscripts for review as confidential documents. Editors and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
Equal Treatment—Editors of the journal must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content and their contribution to specific disciplines, without regard to gender, race, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest— Editors of the journal and any editorial staff must not use materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript (published or unpublished) for their own research without the author’s written authorization.
Integrity of Blind Reviews—Editors of the journal should ensure the integrity of the blind review process. As such, editors should not reveal either the identity of authors of manuscripts to the reviewers, or the identity of reviewers to authors.
Publication Decisions—Editors of the journal are responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal should be reviewed or published. However, editors may consult other editors or reviewers in making such decisions.
Cooperative involvement in investigations—Editors of the journal should conduct a proper and fair investigation when an ethical complaint (concerning a submitted or published manuscript) is reported. Such process may include contacting the author(s) of the manuscript and the institution, giving due process of the respective complaint. If the complaint has merits, a proper action should be taken (publication correction, retraction, etc.). Besides, every reported action of unethical publishing behavior should be investigated even if it is discovered years after publication.
Duties of Reviewers
Confidentiality—Reviewers must consider all received manuscripts for review as confidential documents. Received manuscripts must not be seen by or discussed with others, except as authorized by the journal editors or authorized editorial staff.
Objectivity—Reviewers should conduct their reviews objectively. Criticism of the author’s personality or the topic is unprofessional and inappropriate. Reviewers should explain their recommendations clearly and explicitly and provide rational support and justification. Editors Recommendations could be one of the following:
• Accept the publication of the manuscript after compliance with the reviewers’ recommendations.
• Consider the publication of the manuscript after minor changes recommended by its reviewers.
• Consider the publication of the manuscript after major changes recommended by its reviewers.
• Reject the publication of the manuscript based on the reviewers’ recommendations
Fast-Track Reviews—Reviewers are requested to complete their reviews within a timeframe of 30 days. Reviewers also are free to decline reviews at their discretion. For instance, if the current work load and/or other commitments make it impossible for reviewers to complete fair reviews in a short timeframe (e.g., few days for fast-track review), reviewers should refuse such invitations for review and promptly inform the editor of the journal.
Qualifications—Reviewers who believe that they are not qualified to review a received manuscript should inform the journal editors promptly and decline the review process.
Disclosure—Information or ideas obtained through blind reviews must be kept confidential and must not be used by reviewers for personal benefits.
Conflict of Interest —Reviewers should refuse the review of manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest emerging from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships and connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscripts.
Substantial Similarity—Reviewers should inform editors about significant resemblances or overlap between received manuscripts and any other published manuscripts that reviewers are aware of.
Proper and Accurate Citation —Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Statements that include observation, derivation, or argument (currently or previously reported) should be accompanied by a relevant and accurate citation.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions—Reviewers assist editors in making editorial publication decisions, and also assist authors in improving their submitted manuscripts, through the editorial communications with authors. Therefore, reviewers should always provide explicit and constructive feedback to assist authors in improving their work.
Duties of Authors
Originality—Authors submitting manuscript to the journal should ensure that this submission is original work and is neither currently under consideration for publication elsewhere, nor has been published as a copyrighted material before. If authors have used the ideas, and/or words of others researchers, they should acknowledge that through proper quotes or citations.
Plagiarism—Plagiarism appears into various types, such as claiming the authorship of work by others, copying and paraphrasing major parts of others research (without attribution), and using the results of research conducted by other researchers. However, any type of plagiarism is unacceptable and is considered unethical publishing behavior. Such manuscripts will be rejected.
Authorship of Manuscripts—Authorship of a manuscript should be limited to authors who have made significant contributions and the names of authors should be ranked by efforts. The corresponding author must ensure that all listed coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript (as it appeared in the proofreading copy) and agreed to its publication in the journal. Authors can permit others to replicate their work.
Multiple or Concurrent Publication— Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. This action leads to the rejection of the submitted manuscripts.
Acknowledgement of the Work of Others—Authors should always properly and accurately acknowledge the work of others. Authors should cite publications that have significant contribution to their submitted manuscripts. Unacknowledged work of others contributing to manuscripts is unethical behavior and is unacceptable. Such manuscripts will be rejected.
Reported objectives, discussions, data, statistical analysis, and results should be accurate. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate results constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Such manuscripts will be rejected.
Data Access and Retention— Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with manuscripts for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data if possible. However, such authors should be prepared to retain data for a reasonable time after publication.
Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects— If a research study involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author(s) must clearly identify these in the submitted manuscript. Authors should also inform participating human subjects about the purpose of the study.
Conflicts of Interest— In their manuscript(s), authors should disclose any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
Copyright of Accepted Manuscripts—Authors of accepted manuscripts for publication in the journal agree that the copyright will be transferred to journal and all authors should sign copyright forms. However, those authors have the right to use of their published manuscripts fairly, such as teaching and nonprofit purposes.
Substantial errors in published Manuscripts—When authors discover substantial errors or inaccuracy in their own published manuscripts, it is the authors’ responsibility to promptly inform the journal editors or publisher, and cooperate with them to correct their manuscripts.
Acknowledgement of Indirect Contributors and Financial Supporters—Authors should acknowledge individuals whose contributions are indirect or marginal (e.g., colleagues or supervisors who have reviewed drafts of the work or provided proofreading assistance, and heads of research institutes, centers and labs should be named in an acknowledgement section at the end of the manuscript, immediately preceding the List of References). In addition, all sources of financial support for the research project should be disclosed.
Neither the editors nor the Editorial Board are responsible for authors’ expressed opinions, views, and the contents of the published manuscripts in the journal. The originality, proofreading of manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors.
All manuscripts submitted for review and publication in the journal go under double-blind reviews for authenticity, ethical issues, and useful contributions. Decisions of the reviewers are the only tool for publication in the journal and will be final.
Copyright FRDN Incorporated. Unit 117, Orion Mall, Palm Street, P.O. Box 828, Victoria, Mahé, Seychelles. All Rights Reserved.