Publication ethics

Publication Ethics is an important part of the scientific publishing process. In order to maintain the highest standards of publication, Science Publication has implemented extensive guidelines highlighting the responsibilities of editors, reviewers and authors. These guidelines are based on the Guidelines on Good Publication Practice developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Following, we have outlined a few important guidelines that are required to be followed throughout the publication process.

We are committed to uphold these values in each process of publication. Concerns about misconduct, or about the publication history of a manuscript, go to our ethics team at [email protected]; complaints about how something was handled, or about one of our policies, go to [email protected].

Peer Review Process

Science Publications has been publishing several open access journals for more than twenty years. We have implemented and designed various review procedures before setting up our current Peer Review process. Our current model allows editors to focus directly on research quality, gives authors faster evaluation times while leaving all the tedious administrative tasks to our in-house editorial coordinators. This way, we can ensure that our editors are not overburdened and stretched to their limits during the evaluation process, and instead can provide in-depth analysis to authors highlighting any concerns related to their research. To find out more about our Peer Review process click here.

Guidelines

We have developed extensive guidelines for Editors, Reviewers and Authors to ensure that they meet our standards throughout various steps of the publication process. It is crucial for all members to thoroughly read and follow the guidelines to ensure that there are no issues in publication.

Guide for editorsGuide for reviewersGuide for authors

Rules for authors

Authors must give assurance that no part of manuscript reporting original work is being considered for publication in whole or in part elsewhere. The corresponding author must affirm that all of the other authors have read and approved of the manuscript.

Authorship

An individual who has made considerable academic contributions to a scientific investigation, for example, one who contributes significantly, to the conception, design, execution, analysis and interpretation of the data, participates in drafting, reviewing or revising the manuscript for intellectual content and approves the manuscript to be published.

Corresponding author

If there are multiple authors in an article, one author should be designated as the Corresponding Author. A Corresponding Author assumes overall responsibility for the manuscript, providing significant contribution to the research effort, may not necessarily be the principal investigator or project leader.

Co-Authors

All co-authors of a publication are responsible for providing consent authorship to the Corresponding Author, should contribute in the research work, take responsibility for appropriate portions of the content, acknowledging that they have reviewed and approved the manuscript and are responsible for the content of all appropriate portions of the manuscript, including the integrity of any applicable research. Authors may acknowledge those people who helped in research project, such as office staff, editorial assistants, medical writers, or other individuals in their acknowledgement. Guest (symbolic), gift (an individual who has not contributed to the research work) and ghost authors are all inconsistent with the definition of authorship, and are unacceptable and a violation of this policy.

Conflicts of interest

A Conflict of Interest exists when judgement regarding the research is influenced by factors such as financial gain or personal relationships. All authors are required to disclose any financial, personal or other associations that may influence or be perceived to influence, their work.

Plagiarism

Science Publications is committed to publish original and unpublished material to maintain the integrity of the scientific record. The corresponding author must affirm that all of the other authors have read and approved of the manuscript. All articles submitted to Science Publications are screened for plagiarism using iThenticate. If an article contains traces of plagiarism, Science Publications will lead an investigation on the matter and will take further action depending on the type of plagiarism. Duplicate submission / publication: Authors must assure that the manuscript is not being considered for publication in whole or in part elsewhere. Processing on manuscripts found to have been published elsewhere or under review will be suspended and authors will suffer sanctions.

Citation manipulation

Citation manipulation refers to the publication of an article primarily to increase an author’s number of citations. This is against our Ethical Guidelines and we strongly advise authors not to indulge in similar activities.

Redundant publication

Redundant publication refers to publishing the same intellectual material more than once, by the author. Suspected cases of redundant manuscript submission will be handled as per the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

Research with people and animals

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with any ethical standards set by a governing committee responsible for human experimentation (ie, if applicable, a university review board) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must, in a separate document, explain the rationale for their approach, and, if presented before a review body, demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study.

Studies using human subjects are required to state in the manuscript that all human subjects were provided with the approved informed consent.

When reporting experiments on animals, indicate whether the institution's or the National Research Council's guide for, or any national law on, the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.

Research integrity

Every submission is checked for text similarity with iThenticate. Where there are doubts we also look for manipulated images or data, fabricated results and signs of paper-mill activity, such as recycled text and figures, manipulated authorship or citation rings.

Suspected cases are investigated by the ethics team following COPE’s guidance: the authors are asked to explain, and their institution may be told. Outcomes range from no action to rejection, a correction, an expression of concern or a retraction. A retraction needs the recorded agreement of the journal’s editor-in-chief (or, while there is none, of its managing editor or interim editor-in-chief) and the publisher’s confirmation; the notice gives the reasons.

Complaints and Concerns

Although, Science Publications tries to ensure the highest standards are met throughout the publication process, there can be instances where editors, reviewers and/or authors need to share their concerns. To report misconduct, write to the ethics team at [email protected]; questions or complaints about our policies go to [email protected].

We take all complaints seriously and would require the complainant to remain in contact. We will initiate an investigation into the allegation and gather all evidence for the case. Our Ethics Team will coordinate with all parties involved to make sure that the complaint is properly addressed and a conclusion is reached in accordance with the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). If the complaint raises valid concerns, the journal will implement sanctions on authors according to severity of the breach.

Science Publications might find it compulsory in some cases to rectify certain pieces of literature. In which cases, Science Publications will abide by the COPE Retraction Guidelines.

An Erratum, or correction of an article, should be issued if:

• A small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error)
• The author / contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included)

Manuscripts should be retracted if:

• Journal Editors have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error)
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication)
• It constitutes plagiarism
• It reports unethical research

Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if:

• They receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors
• There is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case
• They believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair and impartial or conclusive
• An investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time