PUBLICATION ETHICS
Publication Ethics and Error Reporting

Writer's Duties

Reporting standards: authors must present accurate data of the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of the importance of the research. Researchers must present the results of their research honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate manipulation of data. A manuscript must contain enough detail and references to allow others to repeat the research. Statements that are known to be inaccurate or fraudulent constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow the journal submission guidelines.
Originality and plagiarism: authors must ensure that they have written their work completely. Manuscripts should not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to joint publication. Previous work and relevant publications, both by other researchers and the authors themselves, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. Primary literature should be included whenever possible. Original wording quoted directly by other researchers from publications should appear in quotation marks with appropriate citation.
Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication: authors should not generally submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. It is hoped that authors will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts that describe the same research in more than one journal. Submission of the same manuscript in more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publicity behavior. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified and the primary publication should be referenced.
Acknowledgment of sources: authors must acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cited publications that have influenced the nature of the work performed. Appropriate recognition of the work of others should be given.
Paper authorship: authorship of research publications must accurately reflect the individual's contribution to the work and reporting. Authorship should be limited to those who have made substantial contributions to the concept, design, execution or interpretation of the reported research. People who have made major contributions should be noted as co-authors. If the main contributors are recorded as authors, then their less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or publication are recorded in the acknowledgement section. The authors also ensure that all authors have seen and agree to submit a version of the manuscript and include their names as co-authors.

Notification and conflicts of interest: authors must clearly notify in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that may affect the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published work: if the author finds an error or important inaccuracy in a manuscript that has been submitted (submitted), then the author must immediately notify the editor or journal publisher and work with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper
Human or animal risks and subjects: authors should clearly identify in their manuscript if their work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have inherent risks that are not typical for their use.

Editor's Obligations

Publication Decision: Based on the review report from the editorial board, the editor may accept, reject or request modifications to a manuscript. Such decisions should be driven by the validation and importance of the relevant manuscript to researchers and readers. Editors can be guided by the policies of the editorial board and applicable legal requirements such as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may discuss with other editors or with reviewers to make this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies that ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the publisher.
Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors must also explain their peer review process to authors, including indicating the parts of the journal that are reviewed. The editor must include peer reviewers who are appropriate to the manuscript to be published by selecting people who are experts and do not have a conflict of interest.
Fair Play: Editors must ensure that every manuscript received will be reviewed for its intellectual content without considering the gender, race, religion, nationality of the author. An important part of the responsibility to produce fair and unbiased decisions is upholding the principles of editorial freedom and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position because they make decisions about publication, so ensuring that the process is carried out fairly and unbiased is crucial.
Confidentiality: Editors must ensure the confidentiality of information related to manuscripts submitted by authors. Editors should critically assess possible breaches of data protection and author confidentiality. This requires appropriate informed consent regarding the proposed research and publication where necessary.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor may not use unpublished material for his or her own research without the written consent of the author. The editor may not be involved in making decisions regarding the manuscript/writing if the editor has a conflict of interest in it.

 

Reviewers' Obligations

Confidentiality: Information related to manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and processed as special information. This information may not be shown or discussed other than with parties permitted by the editor.
Acknowledged sources: Reviewers should ensure that authors are aware of all data sources used in the research. Reviewers should identify other relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Every statement in the form of observation, derivation or opinion that has been written previously must be accompanied by relevant quotations. Reviewers must immediately notify the journal management if they find irregularities, have notes regarding the ethical aspects of the article, find similarities in substance between the submitted article and articles published in other journals or articles, or suspect errors during research writing or manuscript submission; However, reviewers must maintain confidentiality and not investigate further personally unless the journal manager asks for further information or direction.
Objectivity Standards: Review of submitted manuscripts must be conducted objectively and reviewers must present their reviews with clear supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding specifically requested feedback, unless they have a strong argument against doing so. Reviewers must provide constructive reviews and feedback so that they can help the author to improve the manuscript. Reviewers should be able to explain which additional investigations are necessary to support the claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which would simply strengthen or enrich the paper.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Specific information or ideas obtained during peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not review a manuscript that creates a conflict of interest originating from competition, collaboration, or other relationships with authors, companies or institutions related to the manuscript. For double-blind reviews, reviewers must notify the journal manager if the author's identity has the potential to give rise to a conflict of interest.
Accuracy: Reviewers should respond within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are confident enough that they can provide feedback within the agreed time period, and inform the journal manager if additional time is needed. If the reviewer feels that it is not possible to complete the review of a manuscript within the specified time, they must communicate this to the editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.