Publication Ethic


Reporting Standards

The author who writes the research report must present an accurate report of the work done and discuss the purpose of the research significance. The underlying data must be explained accurately in the research report text. The research report must contain enough detail and references to enable others to emulate the work. Reports containing fraud or intentions regarding inaccurate data are unethical and unacceptable behavior

Data Access and Retention

If needed, the writer is asked to provide raw data related to editorial needs. The author must be prepared to provide the data within a predetermined time period

Originality and Plagiarism

The writers must ensure that the work written is entirely original and if the author uses the work and or sentences of others then must use citations or be quoted correctly

Multiple Publishing or similarity of content

An author should not publish manuscripts that describe the same research essence in more than one journal or publisher. Sending the same text to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior

Source Recognition

Proper recognition of the work of others must always be given. Authors must cite publications or ideas that influence the nature of the work reported.

Preparation of reports

The names of authors listed should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the concept, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research reported. All people who have contributed significantly must be registered as co-authors. Parties who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project must be recognized or registered as contributors. The lead author must ensure that the co-authors whose names are listed in the report are those that are truly eligible to be included, and that all co-authors have seen and agreed to the final version of the report and have agreed to publish the report

Disclosure and conflict of interest

All authors must disclose in the text of the report any financial or substantive conflict of interest that might be expected to affect the results or interpretation of the draft text

A fundamental error in the published work

When the authors find significant errors or inaccuracies in the published work, the author is obliged to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to withdraw or correct the work


Principle of Justice

The editor always evaluates the intellectual content of the manuscript regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors


The editor and any editorial staff are prohibited from disclosing any information about the manuscript submitted to anyone other than the writer, reviewer, potential reviewer, editorial advisors and publisher

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished material but mentioned in a proposed paper may not be used in the editor's personal research without the written consent of the author

Decision of Publication

The journal editorial board is responsible for deciding articles to be published. The editors can be guided by the policies of the journal editorial board and are limited by legal provisions such as defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors can negotiate with other editors or reviewers in making this decision

Manuscript Review

The editor must ensure that each initial script has been evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must regulate and use peer review fairly and wisely. The editor must explain the peer review process in informing the author and indicating which parts of the journal are reviewed. The editor must use the proper peer reviewer for the manuscript to be published by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding people with conflicts of interest


Contribution to Editorial Decisions:

Peer review helps the editor in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with the author can also assist the writer in improving the quality of the manuscript


Any reviewer who is selected but feels ineligible to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that a quick review is impossible is required to notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process


Objectivity Standards

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism from the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments.


Every script accepted for review must be a confidential document. Manuscripts may not be displayed or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Important information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers are prohibited from linking texts with conflicts of interest caused by competitive, collaborative, or other relationships and there is a connection with one of the authors, companies, or institutions related to the text of the report

Source Recognition

The reviewer must identify the work that has been published that is relevant but has not been cited by the author. A statement that observations, derivations or arguments have been reported before must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers must also increase the attention of editors regarding the substantial similarities or overlaps between the reviewed manuscripts and any other published papers that they are aware of.