Publication is a reflection of articles quality of writers and its institutions. Articles publication which are produced by a blind-review process can support and realize a scientific approach. Therefore, an ethical standard is required for all parties which are involved in publication (editors, peer reviewers, and authors).
This ethical guideline is adopted from Elsevier (https://www.elsevier.com).
Ethical Standards For Editors
1. Publication Decision
The editor in chief is responsible in deciding which articles will be published from received articles. This decision is based on its articles validation as well as article contribution to researchers and readers. In carrying out its duties, the editor in chief is based on the editor board's policies and provisions of prevailing laws and regulations such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor in chief may discuss with other editors or peer reviewers in decision making.
2. Peer Review Process
The editor in chief must make sure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and on time. The article will be reviewed by at least two independent peer reviewers, and if necessary, the editor should seek additional opinions. The board of editor will select relevant peer reviewers who have relevant expertise in relevant sciences and must follow best practices to avoid selection of fake peer reviewers. The board of editor will review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citation made by peer reviewers in determining whether there is potential for bias.
3. Objective Assessment
The board of editor determines a manuscript based on its intellectual content without any discrimination in religion, ethnic origin, gender, nation, and etc.
4. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest
The editorial team will not disclose any information about the received manuscript to anyone other than the writer, reviewer, and prospective reviewer. The editorial team will protect the confidentiality of all material which is submitted to the journal and all communications with any peer reviewers and any related parties, unless it is agreed by author and the relevant peer reviewers. In exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the publisher, the editorial team may share information in limited with other journal editors deemed necessary to investigate alleged research error.
Research materials (data, research instruments, etc.) which is contained in unpublished manuscripts must not be used in editorial team members research without the author's written consent. Special information or ideas which is obtained by peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
An editor board member should refuse to review manuscript if the editor has a conflict of interest, due to a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript.
5. Vigilance over the Published Record
An editor presented with convincing evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant.
Ethical Standards For Peer Reviewers
1. Contribution to Editorial Decision
The peer review process which is conducted by peer reviewers assist editor in chief in editorial decision making. Peer review is an important component of formal scientific communication and scientific approach.
If the assigned reviewer feels unqualified for a manuscript review or knows that it is impossible to review on time, the assigned reviewer should notify the editorial team immediately.
2. Confidentiality
Any received manuscripts for review must be treated as a confidential document. The peer reviewers must not show or discuss their results to others without permission of editorial team.
Research materials (data, research instruments, etc.) which is contained in unpublished manuscripts must not be used in research of peer reviewers without the author's written consent.
3. Awareness of Ethical Issues
Peer reviewers should identify scientific articles which have not been cited by the author. The peer reviewers should notify editorial team in substantial or overlapping similarities between manuscript which being reviewed with other published articles, according to peer reviewers knowledges. Any statements about observations or arguments which is published previously should be accompanied by relevant citations.
4. Standards of Objectivity and Conflict of Interest
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Peer reviewers should be realize self subjectivity which may arise in manuscript reviewing. The peer reviewers should express his views clearly with supporting argument.
If peer reviewers suggest the author (in the articles he reviewed) to include their articles (or their colleagues), it should be based on scientific reasons and not aim to increase the number of citations or increase the visibility of their work.
Ethical Standards For Authors
1. Reporting Standards
The author should present an accurate research report on the research as well as present an objective analysis and discussion of its research significance. Research data should be presented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript should be detailed with adequate references to permit others to replicate the scientific work. Fraudulent or inaccurate manuscript presentation are unethical and unacceptable behavior.
2. Data Access
Authors may be asked to provide data which supporting their paper for review. The author may provide public access to such data if it is possible, and should be able to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure their scientific work originality, and if the author have used the works and/or words of others, it has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all forms is unethical in scientific works publication and is unacceptable. There are various forms of plagiarism, such as acknowledging another’s paper as the author’s own paper, copying or rewriting substantial parts of another's work without mentioning the source, as well as claiming another's work.
4. Terms of Submission
Authors may not publish the same article in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or primary publication concurrently is unethical and unacceptable behavior.
5. Authorship of Manuscripts
Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, implementation, or interpretation of the research. All persons who have made substantial contribution must be registered as co-authors. If there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research (eg editing the language), they may be listed in acknowledgement section. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have been included in the manuscript, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed its submission for publication.
6. Hazards and Human Research Objects
If the research involves a human object, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement which explain that all procedures are performed in appropriate with relevant laws and have been approved by the relevant institution. The author should include a statement in the manuscript that the agreement has been obtained for experiment with human object. The privacy rights of the human object must always be observed, and approvals, permissions, and statements must be obtained where the author wishes to include case details or other personal information in the manuscript. The author should retain the written consent and if the journal requests, the author must provide the agreement copy.
7. Errors in Published Works
When the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in his/her own published work, the author is obliged to notify the journal editorial team and work together with the editorial team to retrieve or correct the manuscript immediately. If the editorial team obtains information from third parties that the published manuscript contains errors, the author is obliged to withdraw or refine the manuscript or provide evidence of the manuscript accuracy to the editorial team.