Ethical Policy
Research results
Authors must be honest in making claims for the results and conclusions of their research. Making inflated claims for a project interferes with the objective evaluation of its results and applications, and can lead to an unfair and wasteful distribution of resources.
Authors should strive to avoid mistakes in research and exercise due diligence in presenting high quality work for publication. They should critically assess the likelihood of experimental, methodological and human errors and avoid self-deception and bias. Where possible they should conduct an internal review to assess the validity of their work before publication.
Author roles and responsibilities
Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the "Acknowledgements" section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
Responsibility of the corresponding author
It is the corresponding author's responsibility to ensure that all named authors have approved the submitted version of the article, and all further revisions, agree to its submission and are willing to take appropriate responsibility for it.
It is important that all authors have approved the final version of the article as accepted for publication.
It is the corresponding author's responsibility to ensure the paper is not under consideration by any other journal at the time of submission.
Co-authors
Some co-authors will be accountable for the entire article, for example those who provide critical data, written the article, present the findings at conferences or provide leadership for junior colleagues. Other co-authors may be responsible for specific contributions to an article. Authors should not use acknowledgements misleadingly to imply a contribution or endorsement by individuals who have not, in fact, been involved with the work or given an endorsement. Changes in authorship
Changes in authorship
changes to authorship during the publication process must be approved by all authors of the paper, and all authors must confirm to the journal that they give their consent. In addition, you must explain to the journal the reasons behind the change in authorship based on the guidelines above.
Referencing
Authors have a responsibility to acknowledge the work of others used in their research and to cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of their study. Information obtained in private correspondence or conversation should only be used with the explicit permission of the individuals involved. Information obtained whilst providing confidential services, such as refereeing research articles or grant applications, should not be used without permission of the original author.
All sources for the article must be clearly disclosed and permissions obtained from the original authors (and original publishers if they hold the copyright) for any figures or significant extracts that are to be reproduced or quoted. Collection of such permissions is the responsibility of the authors.
References should be helpful to the reader and advance the article, so authors should ensure they are relevant, recent and easy to find.
Misconduct and handling
Fabrication, falsification or selective reporting of data with the intent to mislead or deceive is unethical, as is the theft of data or research results from others. The results of research should be recorded and maintained to allow for analysis and review. Following publication, the data should be retained for a reasonable period and made available upon request. Exceptions may be appropriate in certain circumstances in order to preserve privacy, to assure patent protection, or for similar reasons.
Our relationship with our authors is based on trust and we publish submitted material in good faith. However, if a possible breach of ethics is brought to our attention, we will refer the case to our Research Integrity Panel for investigation. The panel includes representation from our legal department, as well as senior management and editorial staff. The panel may seek advice from the journal's Editorial Board, and may need to escalate an investigation to author's institution(s) for further information.
Plagiarism
Reproducing text from other papers without properly crediting the source (plagiarism) or producing many papers with almost the same content by the same authors (self-plagiarism) is not acceptable. Submitting the same results to more than one journal concurrently is unethical. Exceptions are the review articles. Authors may not present results obtained by others as if they were their own. Authors should acknowledge the work of others used in their research and cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of their study.
Duplicate submission
It is unethical to submit the same, or essentially the same, article to a second primary research journal whilst it remains under active consideration by another. It is the corresponding author's responsibility to ensure the paper is not under consideration by any other journal at the time of submission. The submitted article will be removed without consideration.
Corrections and retractions
All authors have an obligation to inform and cooperate with journal editors to provide prompt retractions or correction of errors in published works.
- The journal will issue retractions if:
- There are clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g, data fabrication) or honest error (e.g, miscalculation or experimental error)
- The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication);
- It constitutes plagiarism;
- It reports unethical research.
- The journal will issue errata if:
- A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);
- The author list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).
Other forms of misconduct include failure to meet clear ethical and legal requirements such as misrepresentation of interests, breach of confidentiality, lack of informed consent and abuse of research subjects or materials. Misconduct also includes improper dealing with infringements, such as attempts to cover up misconduct and reprisals on whistleblowers.
The primary responsibility for handling research misconduct is in the hands of those who employ the researchers. If a possible misconduct is brought to our attention, we will seek advice from the referees and the Editorial Board. If there is the evidence, we will resolve the matter by appropriate corrections in the printed and online journal; by refusing to consider an author's future work, for a given period, and by contacting affected authors and editors of other journals.
Minor misdemeanours may not lead to formal investigations, but are just as damaging given their probable frequency, and should be corrected by teachers and mentors.
Human and Animal Rights
If the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki), for experiments involving humans; Uniform Requirements for manuscripts submitted to Biomedical journals. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Informed consent to participate in the study should be obtained from participants (or their parent or legal guardian in the case of children under 16) for all research involving human subjects. In order to protect participant anonymity, authors do not need to send proof of this consent to us at Global Science Press.
Ethics for reviewers
To uphold impartiality, reviewers should consider any potential conflict of interest before agreeing to review and should decline in the following instances:
- You are in direct competition with the authors
- You are a co-worker or collaborator or have a personal relationship with one of the authors
- You are affiliated with the same institution as one of the authors
- You are in a position to exploit the authors' work (commercially or otherwise)
- You are in a position which prevents you from giving an objective opinion of the work.
Anonymity and confidentiality
Reviewer names are kept strictly confidential. Reviewer identities may only be disclosed to journal Editorial Board members, who are also instructed to maintain confidentiality. You should not disclose your identity to the authors, including sending reports directly to the authors.
Information and ideas obtained whilst acting as a reviewer must be kept confidential and not used for competitive advantage.
We also ask that you do not discuss the papers you have reviewed with colleagues unless they have been published.
Objectivity
Reviewers should judge objectively the quality of the research reported, give fair, frank and constructive criticism and refrain from personal criticism of the authors. Reviewers' judgements should be explained and supported so that authors can understand the basis of the comments and judgements.
Timeliness
Reviewers should inform the journal if they are unable to review a paper or can only do so with some delay. Reviewers should not delay the peer review process unnecessarily, either deliberately or inadvertently.
Duties of Editors
Fair play and editorial independence
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study's validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors' explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
Publication decisions
The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers' comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.