Open Access Policy
The journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports greater global exchange of knowledge
Step 1: Publication and Writing
- All submitted papers must go through a rigorous peer-review process by at least two national or international reviewers who are experts in the field of the paper. Reviewers are selected by the Managing Editor and Editor-in-Chief. Authors can also propose reviewers for several journals and types of articles.
- The factors considered in the review are relevance, originality, readability, statistical validity, and language.
- Possible decisions include acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.
- If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit their manuscript, there is no guarantee that the revised manuscript will be accepted.
- Rejected articles will not be reviewed.
- Acceptance of papers is limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
- Research may not appear in more than one publication, either in the same journal or in other journals.
Step 2: Author Responsibilities
- Authors must certify that the manuscript is their original work.
- The author must state that the manuscript has not been published elsewhere, or even submitted and reviewed in another journal.
- Authors must participate in the peer review process and follow comments.
- The author is obliged to provide retraction or correction of errors.
- All Authors mentioned in the paper must have made significant contributions to the research. Their level of contribution should also be specified in the “Author Contributions” section of the article.
- Authors must declare that all data in the paper is real and authentic.
- Authors must notify the Editor of any conflict of interest.
- The author must identify all sources used in creating the manuscript.
- Authors must report any errors they find in their published papers to the Editor.
- The author must not use sources that are not relevant so that they can help other research/journals.
- Authors cannot withdraw their articles during the review process or after submission, or they must pay a fine determined by the publisher.
Step 3: Peer Review / Reviewer Responsibilities
- Reviewers must keep all information regarding the paper confidential and treat it as privileged information.
- Reviews must be conducted objectively, without personal criticism of the author. The authors' self-knowledge should not influence their comments and decisions.
- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments in 400 to 800 words.
- Reviewers can identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author.
- Reviewers should also draw the Editor-in-Chief's attention to any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they are personally aware.
- Reviewers should not review manuscripts that have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript.
Step 4: Editorial Responsibilities
- The Editor (Executing Editor or Chief Editor) has full responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
- Editors must always consider the needs of authors and readers when trying to improve a publication.
- Editors must ensure the quality of the paper and the integrity of the academic record.
- The editor must make corrections when necessary.
- Editors should base their decisions solely on the importance of the paper, its originality, clarity, and relevance to the scope of the publication.
- The editor may not reverse his decision or overturn the previous editor's decision without serious reasons.
- Editors must maintain the anonymity of reviewers.
- Editors must ensure that all research material they publish complies with internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
- Editors should only accept papers if there is sufficient certainty.
- Editors must act if they suspect misconduct, whether the paper is published or not, and make every reasonable effort to pursue resolution of the matter.
- Editors should not reject papers based on suspicion; they must have proof of the violation.
- Editors must not allow conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.
- Editors may not change their decision after delivering a decision (especially after rejection or acceptance) unless they have serious reasons.
Step 5: Publicize Ethics Issues
- All editorial members, reviewers, and authors must confirm and comply with the rules specified by COPE.
- The corresponding author is the main owner of the article so he can withdraw the article if it is incomplete (before entering the review process or when a revision is requested).
- Authors cannot make major changes to an article after it has been accepted without serious reasons.
- All editorial members and authors must be willing to publish all forms of correction honestly and completely.
- Any record of plagiarism, false data, or other types of fraud must be fully reported to COPE.