Publication Ethics

Author's Duties

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors of original research reports must present an accurate account of the work done as well as an objective discussion of its significance. The underlying data must be accurately represented in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior.
  2. Data Access and Retention: Authors are requested to provide raw data in relation to papers for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), where possible, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
  3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written a completely original piece of work, and if authors have used the work and/or words of others that has been appropriately quoted or cited.
  4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: An author should not, in general, publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one major journal or publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.
  5. Acknowledgment of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work being reported.
  6. Authorship of Papers: Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, conduct, or interpretation of the reported research. All persons who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are other people who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be recognized or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have approved its submission for publication.
  7. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
  8. Fundamental errors in published work: When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in his or her published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
  9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors should clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Editor Duties

  1. Fair play: Editors at all times evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality, or political philosophy.
  2. Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff should not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors, and publishers as appropriate.
  3. Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts should not be used in the editors' own research without the written consent of the authors.
  4. Publication Decisions: The journal editor is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validity of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's board of editors and constrained by legal requirements such as those currently in force relating to defamation, copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making these decisions.
  5. Manuscript Review: The editor should ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors should organize and use peer review fairly and judiciously. Editors should explain their peer review process in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Reviewer Duties

  1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review helps editors in making editorial decisions and through editorial communication with authors can also help authors in improving the paper.
  2. Speed: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in the manuscript or knows that a speedy review is not possible should inform the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
  3. Objectivity Standard: The review should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the authors is not appropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They should not be shown or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
  5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper.
  6. Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors. Any assertion that an observation, derivation, or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also bring to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers of which they have personal knowledge.