On the ethical principles of publishing an article, the magazine, on the one hand, considers itself obligated to protect the rights of authors, copyright holders and content producers, and on the other hand, believes that it must protect the rights of its audience and readers. Therefore, in order to comply with this important and in line with the international scientific community, it has based its practice of ethics laws on global publishing and has based its policies on this basis.
Everyone involved in the process of publishing an article (author, magazine staff, and reviewers) must accept and act upon the rules and ethical charter of the journal. The publication follows the rules of the International Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
General responsibilities and duties of editors
Editors should:
Take responsibility for any material published in the journal.
Work towards the needs of readers and writers.
Strive to advance the magazine.
Ensure the quality of printed content according to existing trends.
Defend freedom of expression.
Maintain the integrity of the journal's academic background.
Avoid overshadowing moral and intellectual standards by financial needs.
Always be interested in providing corrections, explanations, retrieval of articles, and apologies if needed.
Ethical considerations of the authors:
Authors should not have any fake information, either raw or processed in their submissions.
Scientific honesty must be observed by all authors. Any use of previous sources, whether unpublished or not, should be noted by the authors in the work with reference to the source.
There should be no manifestation of ethnic, cultural, national, sexual, identity, age, linguistic or medical discrimination in the work, otherwise the work will be rejected in the first place.
All authors must have obtained the agreement of the participants in their research. Likewise, the protection of participants' personal rights as well as their personalization of identity must be carefully considered by the authors.
General principles that peer judges are required to follow:
Judges must:
Only judge the initial versions of articles that fall within their professional capacity and are also able to do them on time.
Respect the confidentiality of peer review information and do not disclose any original copy information at any stage of the review.
Do not use the information obtained when judging to their advantage or that of any other person or organization, nor do they use this information to harm or discredit others.
Report potential inconsistencies with the journal's interests or, if one is unsure of the inconsistencies, contact the journal to make sure.
Do not allow their judgment to be influenced by issues such as nationality, religion, political beliefs, gender, or other such issues concerning the author.
Be impartial and constructive in criticism and avoid verbal violence, offensive and offensive terms.
Have a proper understanding of the reciprocity of the peer review process and do their part of the work at the specified time.
Forgery of another person's identity during the arbitration process is considered abusive and very serious.
Expectations during the peer review process:
Judges must:
Be accountable at the appointed time, especially if they are unable to make judgments.
Inform if they do not have the necessary professional ability to judge.
Only agree to arbitration if they are able to do so under an agreed timeline.
Report any incompatibilities with interests.
In cases of inconsistencies in arbitration, follow the policy of the magazine.
Judge the original version that has already been judged for other journals completely from the beginning as there is a possibility of many variations between the two different presentations.
Ensure that their suggestions for an alternate arbitrator are appropriate to them and not personal.
Avoid accepting the judgment of the original version, which they wish to judge only for the purpose of obtaining information about it, and not the actual judgment.
Avoid accepting work if they are unable to judge impartially.
If they have played a role in the research in any way, they should avoid judging it.
Refrain from judging if the research itself, similar to the original, is underway or has been submitted to another journal.
Expectations at the time of refereeing:
Judges must:
If they encounter a discrepancy during the judging that was not apparent when accepting the job, notify the journal immediately.
If they are unable to judge all parts of the original version, notify the journal immediately.
Refrain from involving other persons, including students and trainees, in arbitration without obtaining permission from the journal.
Keep the entire original version provided and its reviews confidential.
In the case of anonymous two-sided judgments, if they suspect the identity of the author, and this causes a special inconsistency, inform the journal.
If they encounter any particular irregularities or ethical points about various aspects of the work when judging, notify the journal immediately.
Do not intentionally judge longer than the scheduled time.
Ensure that their judgment is based on the nature of the work presented and not influenced by personal, financial or other inconsistencies.
Refrain from contacting authors without obtaining permission from the journal.
Expectations when preparing an arbitration report:
Judges must:
Be constructive and impartial and let the authors know their constructive opinions to improve the original version.
Refrain from making insulting comments and baseless accusations.
Criticize in detail and general comments from relevant evidence to substantiate the opinion.