ETHICS OF PUBLICATIONS AND PREVENTION OF UNCONSCIENTIOUS PRACTICE OF PUBLICATIONS
This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Duties of Editors
Publication decisions. The editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editorial board will be guided by the policies of the journal and constrained by legal requirements related to libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Members of the editorial board will confer and refer to reviewers recommendations in making this decision.
Equality. An editor, member of the editorial board or reviewer must evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, political philosophy, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, or religious belief of the authors.
Confidentiality. The edition board guarantees confidentiality, that is, it undertakes not to disclose information about the given manuscript to anyone other than the respective authors, reviewers, other editorial consultants and, if necessary, the publisher.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's, reviewer’s or any other reader’s own research without the express written consent of the author.
Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Reviewers assist the editorial board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications during the open review process with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Qualification of Reviewers. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. The editorial board is responsible for ensuring the promptness of responses in the open review process.
Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review in the open review process are subjected to the criteria of enhancing their rationality through the mutual rational controls of critical discussion.
Establishing Standards of Objectivity through Critical Discussion. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in the spirit of enhancing the quality of the paper through the mutual rational controls of critical discussion.
Acknowledgement of Sources. References to the ideas of others should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must only be used with the explicit agreement of the participants in the peer review.
Duties of Authors
Reporting standards. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper.
Originality and Plagiarism. The Editorial Board of Journal recognize different cultural beliefs about the acceptability of quoting the ideas of others as if they were one’s own, and authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
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.
Fundamental errors in published works. When an author or reader discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.