Publishing Ethics

 | Post date: 2020/08/2 | 
Publishing Ethics
The editorial board of Journal of Control (English Edition), JoC-EE, is committed to observe all the ethical publishing standards entirely. JoC-EE follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) [1] to handle potential acts of misconduct. These guidelines are adopted from COPE, as follows. Also, further elaborations are adopted from Elsevier [2] . All authors, editorial board, reviewers, and readers should follow these ethical policies when working with JoC-EE.
Duties of Authors
  1. Manuscripts must be submitted with the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere, in English or any other language, and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by or any other publisher. [COPE]
  2. The research being reported should have been conducted ethically and responsibly and should comply with all relevant legislation. [COPE]
  3. Researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. [COPE]
  4. Researchers should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that others can confirm their findings. [COPE]
  5. Researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarized, and has not been published elsewhere. [COPE]
  6. Authors should take collective responsibility for submitted and published work. [COPE]
  7. The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting. [COPE]
7.1 Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.  All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors. [Elsevier]
7.2 Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper (e.g., language editing or medical writing), they should be recognized in the acknowledgments section. [Elsevier]
7.3 The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. [Elsevier]
  1. Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed. [COPE]
8.1 Conflict of interest is defined as “a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities, such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests”. [WAME, Elsevier]
  1. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services. [Elsevier]
  2. If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. [Elsevier]
  3. It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Manipulating images for improved clarity is accepted, but manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly. [Elsevier].
Duties of Editor
  1. The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The editor may confer with other reviewers in making these decisions. [Elsevier]
  2. The editor is accountable and takes responsibility for all journal publications.[COPE]
  3. The editor makes fair and unbiased decisions independent of commercial consideration and ensures a fair and appropriate peer-review process. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary, the editor should seek additional opinions. [COPE] [Elsevier]
  4. The editor should adopt editorial policies that encourage maximum transparency and complete, honest reporting. [COPE]
  5. The editor should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. [COPE]
  6. The editor will pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct. [COPE]
  7. The editor critically assesses the ethical conduct of studies in humans and animals. [COPE]
  8. The editor has appropriate policies for handling editorial conflicts of interest. [COPE]
  9. The editor does not attempt to influence the journal’s ranking by artificially increasing any journal metric. [Elsevier]
  10. The editor ensures the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. [Elsevier]
Duties of Reviewers
  1. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. [Elsevier]
  2. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process. [Elsevier]
  3. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor. [Elsevier]
3.1 Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. [Elsevier]
  1. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and consider when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their scientific views clearly with supporting arguments. [Elsevier]
  2. Reviewers should consult the editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. [Elsevier]

View: 1345 Time(s)   |   Print: 242 Time(s)   |   Email: 0 Time(s)   |   0 Comment(s)

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Control (English Edition)

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb