When it comes to published scientific papers, authors, reviewers, and editors all have ethical responsibilities. The publisher tries to work closely with journal editors, authors, and peer-reviewers in order to maintain high ethical standards of publication. The ethics statement for the Applied Sciences and Technology Express is based on the Code of Conduct principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) at www.publicationethics.org.
The following are the essentials of The Applied Sciences and Technology Express’s publishing ethics for all parties engaged in the publication process:
EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
The editor of a journal is a crucial figure who makes critical editorial judgments on all peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted for publication.
The editor should make every effort to guarantee that the peer review and publication processes are completed on time and without undue delays. Editors and other members of the editorial board should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own work. When they are authors or have contributed to a work, they should be excluded from publication decisions. The editor should provide precise advice on peer reviewers’ roles and obligations, as well as check their quality and timeliness.
The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication.
The editor should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding their academic merit free of any self-interest.
PEER REVIEWERS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, critical, and unbiased assessment of the submitted work’s scientific substance in a timely way. They should evaluate each paper on its own merits, regardless of the author’s colour, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree, or affiliation with a particular institution (s).
Peer reviewers should play a key role in identifying potential misconduct, such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, and conflict of interests, and alerting the journal editor.
The confidentiality of the entire review process should be respected by peer reviewers.
Peer Reviewers should write a constructive, thorough, well-supported, and meaningful peer-review report.
Peer Reviewers must avoid making remarks in their reports that could jeopardise the reputation of others.
Peer Reviewers must agree to peer review submissions only if they are experts in the field and can do it in a reasonable amount of time.
In any case, peer reviewers should contact the editor if they decline the review.
After reviewing a paper, peer reviewers are obligated to destroy it along with all related materials.
AUTHORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES
Authors should make all their research findings public and are responsible for the completeness and accuracy of their reports.
The author(s) should guarantee that the manuscript they have submitted is their own original work, that it does not infringe on anybody else’s intellectual property rights, and that it is free of plagiarism, including their own previously published work.
Despite having differing contributions, all authors mentioned on a document are deemed equally responsible for the content of a submitted manuscript or published work.
At the same time, the work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s).
Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest. Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper. If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
Author(s) must obtain permission from any content used from other sources.
When it comes to published scientific papers, authors, reviewers, and editors all have ethical responsibilities. The publisher tries to work closely with journal editors, authors, and peer-reviewers in order to maintain high ethical standards of publication. The ethics statement for the Applied Sciences and Technology Express is based on the Code of Conduct principles published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) at www.publicationethics.org.
The following are the essentials of The Applied Sciences and Technology Express’s publishing ethics for all parties engaged in the publication process:
The editor of a journal is a crucial figure who makes critical editorial judgments on all peer-reviewed manuscripts submitted for publication.
The editor should make every effort to guarantee that the peer review and publication processes are completed on time and without undue delays. Editors and other members of the editorial board should not be involved in editorial decisions on their own work. When they are authors or have contributed to a work, they should be excluded from publication decisions. The editor should provide precise advice on peer reviewers’ roles and obligations, as well as check their quality and timeliness.
The editor should ensure confidential handling of the submitted manuscripts and not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before their publication.
The editor should assess manuscripts for their scientific quality content, in an unbiased manner and free from any decisions based on discrimination of race, gender, geographical origin, or religion of the author(s). The editor should evaluate manuscripts regarding their academic merit free of any self-interest.
Peer reviewers should provide a detailed, critical, and unbiased assessment of the submitted work’s scientific substance in a timely way. They should evaluate each paper on its own merits, regardless of the author’s colour, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, academic degree, or affiliation with a particular institution (s).
Peer reviewers should play a key role in identifying potential misconduct, such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, unethical research, redundant or duplicate publication, and conflict of interests, and alerting the journal editor.
The confidentiality of the entire review process should be respected by peer reviewers.
Peer Reviewers should write a constructive, thorough, well-supported, and meaningful peer-review report.
Peer Reviewers must avoid making remarks in their reports that could jeopardise the reputation of others.
Peer Reviewers must agree to peer review submissions only if they are experts in the field and can do it in a reasonable amount of time.
In any case, peer reviewers should contact the editor if they decline the review.
After reviewing a paper, peer reviewers are obligated to destroy it along with all related materials.
Authors should make all their research findings public and are responsible for the completeness and accuracy of their reports.
The author(s) should guarantee that the manuscript they have submitted is their own original work, that it does not infringe on anybody else’s intellectual property rights, and that it is free of plagiarism, including their own previously published work.
Despite having differing contributions, all authors mentioned on a document are deemed equally responsible for the content of a submitted manuscript or published work.
At the same time, the work should not have been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s).
Author(s) must clearly declare any potential conflict of interest. Author(s) must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper. If asked to provide a list of suggested reviewers, author(s) must provide the correct details for suitable reviewers with the appropriate experience to review, ensuring that the suggested reviewers do not have a conflict of interest.
Author(s) must obtain permission from any content used from other sources.