Publication ethics

Publication ethics refers to the set of ethical guidelines that govern the process of writing, reviewing, and publishing scholarly work. These guidelines are essential for ensuring the integrity, transparency, and quality of academic and research publications. They apply to authors, reviewers, editors, and publishers involved in the publication process. Key aspects of publication ethics include:

• Honesty: Authors should present their work honestly without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The research should be conducted and reported transparently.
• Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and must appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Plagiarism in any form is unethical and unacceptable.
• Multiple or Concurrent Publication: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical. Similarly, publishing the same data in multiple papers without proper citation or justification dilutes the novelty of the research and is considered unethical.
• Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
• Conflict of Interest: Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any relationships or interests that could influence or appear to influence the work. This includes financial, personal, or professional connections that may affect the integrity of the publication process.
• Peer Review Confidentiality: The peer review process is an essential component of scholarly publication. Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential documents, not to be disclosed or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• Errors in Published Works: If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal's editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the paper.
• Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
• Respect for Participants: Research involving human participants, human data, or human tissues must be performed in accordance with ethical standards and with the approval of an appropriate ethics committee. Consent should be obtained where required.

These ethical principles are designed to ensure the accountability and responsibility of all parties involved in scholarly publishing, and to uphold the quality and integrity of the scientific record.

Peer review process

The peer review process is a fundamental aspect of scholarly publishing. It serves as a quality control mechanism, ensuring that scientific articles meet certain standards of validity, significance, and originality before they are published in academic journals. Here's an overview of the typical peer review process:

• Submission: Authors must submit their manuscripts to scholarly journals for consideration for publication. The submission usually includes a cover letter, the manuscript itself, and any supplementary documents.
• Pre-peer review process: The Editorial office will check the quality of the submitted articles with a high standard plagiarism software before sending those to peer review process, if the articles found plagiarism more than 20 % those will be sent for re writing.
• Editorial Assessment: Upon submission, the editor-in-chief or an associate editor evaluates the manuscript to determine if it meets the journal's scope and basic standards. This initial assessment may also check for adherence to formatting and ethical guidelines.
• Assignment of Reviewers: If the manuscript passes the initial assessment, the editor selects independent experts in the field, typically researchers or academics, to review the manuscript. These individuals are known as peer reviewers or referees.
• Peer Review: The selected reviewers go through the manuscripts carefully and provide detailed feedback on various aspects, including the novelty of the research, methodology, data analysis, interpretation of results, and clarity of writing. Reviewers may also assess the manuscript's significance to the field and its suitability for publication in the journal.
• Editor Decision: Based on the feedback from the peer reviewers, the editor makes a decision regarding the manuscript. Possible decisions include:
• Acceptance: The manuscript is accepted for publication without revisions or with minor revisions
• Revision: The authors are asked to revise the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers' comments and submit a revised version for further evaluation.
• Rejection: The manuscript is not accepted for publication due to significant flaws or lack of suitability for the journal.
• Revision and Resubmission: If the manuscript requires revisions, the authors address the reviewers' comments and make appropriate changes to the manuscript. They may also provide a detailed response letter explaining how they addressed each comment.
• Final Decision: The revised manuscript, along with the authors' response letter (rebuttal form), is reviewed by the editor to ensure that the revisions adequately address the reviewers' concerns. The editor then makes a final decision on whether to accept the manuscript for publication.
• Publication: Once accepted, the manuscript undergoes copyediting and formatting to prepare it for publication according to the journal format. It is then published in the journal online as per the journal's format.