Pixel

Journals
Author
Volume
Issue
Publication Year
Article Type
Keyword

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The Inovatus Usluge Publisher has a commitment to issue and disseminate high-quality research publications. The publisher of the Research Leap platform ensures the transparency and fairness of ethical standards as a core of managing all the editorial operations of the journal. We expect that the actors of this ecosystem, such as authors, editors, reviewers, and publishers understand, accept, and follow the existing rules and regulations of publication ethics.

Editor Responsibility

It is the responsibility of an editor to choose what kind of content will be published in the journal. While selecting the suitable text, the editor makes a decision based on the manuscript merit regardless of the author’s race, gender, political and religious beliefs, ethnicity or nationality.

Confidentiality

Unless agreed differently, the information on a submitted manuscript is shared exclusively among the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial team members, and the publisher.

Conflict of Interest and Disclosure

Without the prior written consent of the author, neither the editors nor the editorial board members are able to use the unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes. In case of conflicts of interest springing from competitive and collaborative relations or connections with any authors, organizations, or institutions related to the study, editors recuse- on their own will- from considering the manuscript. In this case, they hand over their responsibility to a different editorial member.

Reviewers Responsibility

Purpose of Peer Review

The peer review is considered to be an essential process that allows the editor and the editorial board come to sound editorial/publishing decisions as well as assisting the authors in enhancing their submitted work.

Promptness

Should a potential reviewer feel unqualified to evaluate the work during the review process, or is not able to assess it within a deadline, he/she ought to withdraw from the process.

Confidentiality

It is critical that the manuscripts under consideration are considered highly confidential. Any information about them cannot be discussed with the third parties under any circumstances unless the editor gives prior approval.

Objectivity

While being as objective as possible, reviewers should make clear comments based on sound figures and arguments. Personal criticism of any kind is considered inappropriate, and therefore, unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers have the responsibility of detecting relevant published work without citations. It is imperative that any reference to the previous works used in the paper accompanies a citation. Should a reviewer identify any significant resemblance or overlap between the manuscript at hand and another published study they are familiar with, they must notify the editor immediately.

Author Responsibility

Reporting standards

It is an author’s duty to provide an exact account of the work carried out and to outline an impartial argument of its importance. A work must include enough details and references so that others can reuse it. Also, the underlying data should be clearly demonstrated in the paper. Deceptive and unreliable statements ought to be strictly avoided as they are seen as unethical behavior.

Data access and retention

For editorial review purposes, authors might need to submit the raw data of their research attached to the paper as well as being prepared to make it available publicly provided that this data is applicable. Still, authors should make sure that such data is accessible to external professionals for at least ten years after the issuance through institutional/subject-data repositories or different data centers. Meanwhile, authors have to ensure the confidentiality of the participants are safeguarded, and legal rights on proprietary data cannot prevent their publication in any way.

Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgement of sources

Authors have both moral and legal obligation to submit entirely original works with appropriate citations and quotes included. Provided that the nature of the work has been influenced by other publications, such works should also be mentioned.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication

As a rule, the publication of the papers on the same research topic should be restricted to a single journal. It is unethical as well as unacceptable to submit one and the same paper to more than one journal. In addition, the manuscripts issued as copyrighted material somewhere else cannot be sent to be reviewed. Moreover, the manuscripts under the scrutiny of the editorial board should not be submitted to different publications. If it is a journal of creative works, the above-mentioned rules may not apply, and the editor should be consulted for detailed information.

Acknowledgement of sources

The paper should include relevant acknowledgement of others’ works. Any work affecting the nature of the reported paper ought to be cited properly. However, if the information has been acquired privately (form conversations, correspondence, discussions with third parties), it cannot be used freely without getting written permission from the specific source. Also, the information acquired through confidential services (refereeing manuscripts, grant applications) can only be used provided written permission of the author of the work in such services is obtained.

Authorship of the paper

Authors are exclusively those who have made a substantial contribution to the design, execution, conception, or the interpretation of the reported paper. Everybody making substantial contributions has to be referred to as co-authors. In the event, there are other people taking part in the particularly significant aspects of the research, they may be either acknowledged or illustrated as contributors. It is imperative that the author includes the entire group of relevant and non-relevant co-authors. In addition, all the included co-authors should see and approve the final version of the research as well as giving their consent to its publication.

Conflict of interest and disclosure

If authors realize some financial or other substantive conflicts of interests might arise to impact the outcome or interpretation of their manuscript, they should reveal it in their manuscript while submitting. Potential conflicts of interest might involve several examples, such as consultancies, employment, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, or grants and so on. Also, authors should list all sources of financial support for the research project. Readers have the right to be informed about who the project has been funded by as well as the role of the funders. Any potential conflict of interest ought to be revealed to the editor as promptly as possible.

Errors in published works

In case of noticeable errors in the issued work, authors ought to immediately notify the editor of the journal and collaborate in the elimination/correction of them. Should a different party than the author informs the editor about the error, the author is obliged to make an elimination/correction or provide proof about the rightness of the original work.

DON’T MISS OUT!
Subscribe To Newsletter
Be the first to get latest updates and exclusive content straight to your email inbox.
Stay Updated
Give it a try, you can unsubscribe anytime.