Publication Ethics
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
1. Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals published by IACSIT Press is process of permanent knowledge improvement. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.
IACSIT Press takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
2. Duties of Authors
2.1 Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.
2.2 Data access and retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
2.3 Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
2.4 Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
2.5 Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. 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.
2.6 Authorship of the paper
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 significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
2.7 Hazards and human or animal subjects
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. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects, i.e., "All the members gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code XX)". The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
2.8 Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
2.9 Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
3. Duties of Editors
3.1 Publication decisions
The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
3.2 Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
3.3 Confidentiality
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
3.4 Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor'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. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.
3.5 Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. For editors who require details on recommended actions for particular types of ethics complaints, please consult our Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK).
4 Duties of Reviewers
4.1 Contribution to editorial decisions
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. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. IACSIT Press shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
4.2 Promptness
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 excuse himself from the review process.
4.3 Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
4.4 Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4.5 Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
4.6 Disclosure and conflict of interest
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. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
5 Complaints Procedure
At IACSIT Press, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and fairness in all aspects of our publishing operations. We value feedback from our authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders, and we take all complaints seriously. This complaints procedure outlines the steps to follow if you have a concern or grievance related to our publications, processes, or services.
5.1 Scope of Complaints
This procedure applies to complaints regarding, but not limited to:
- Editorial decisions or processes.
- Peer review practices.
- Ethical concerns (e.g., plagiarism, authorship disputes, or research misconduct).
- Delays in publication or communication.
- Errors in published content.
- Customer service issues.
- Billing or payment disputes.
5.2 How to Submit a Complaint
Complaints should be submitted in writing to ensure clarity and accountability. Please follow these steps:
- Contact the Relevant Department by Email [info@iacsitp.com].
- Provide Detailed Information: Your full name and contact information; A clear description of the issue, including relevant dates, publication titles, and any supporting documentation; The desired resolution or outcome.
5.3. Complaint Handling Process
Step 1: Acknowledgment
- Upon receiving your complaint, we will acknowledge it within **3 business days** and provide a reference number for tracking purposes.
Step 2: Investigation
- The relevant department will investigate the complaint thoroughly, which may involve consulting with editors, reviewers, or other parties.
- We aim to complete the investigation within **15 business days**. If additional time is required, we will notify you and provide an updated timeline.
Step 3: Resolution
- Once the investigation is complete, we will provide a written response outlining our findings and any actions taken.
- If the complaint is upheld, we will work with you to implement an appropriate resolution, which may include corrections, retractions, or other remedies.
Step 4: Escalation
- If you are dissatisfied with the outcome, you may request an escalation by contacting the Managing Director of IACSIT Press at [haylee@iacsitp.com].
- The Managing Director will review the case and provide a final decision within **10 business days**.
5.4. Appeals Process
If you believe the final decision is unsatisfactory, you may appeal to an independent third party, such as the **Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)** or another relevant authority, depending on the nature of the complaint.
5.5 Confidentiality
All complaints will be handled confidentially and in accordance with applicable data protection laws. Information will only be shared with parties directly involved in resolving the issue.
5.6. Continuous Improvement
We use feedback from complaints to improve our processes and services. All complaints are recorded and reviewed periodically to identify areas for enhancement.
At IACSIT Press, we are dedicated to addressing your concerns promptly and fairly. Your feedback is essential to maintaining the quality and integrity of our publications and services. Thank you for helping us uphold the highest standards in scholarly publishing.