The Indian Journal of Software Engineering and Project Management (IJSEPM) is having ISSN 2582-8339 (online), half yearly international journal, being published in the months of January and July by Lattice Science Publication (LSP)🔗 Bhopal (M.P.), India since year 2021.
The Guide for Authors and the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS)🔗 support combined efforts by authors, editors, and reviewers to produce a responsible research publication. All authors must know and keep in mind the Editorial policy and the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. Guidelines for the submission of articles and manuscript preparation and format are to be found on the Instructions for authors webpage. The Indian Journal of Software Engineering and Project Management (IJSEPM) strictly adheres to the ethics and policies of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)🔗, World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)🔗, International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)🔗, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)🔗 and Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS)🔗.
Publishing an article in a peer-reviewed🔗 journal is an essential building block in developing a coherent and respected network of knowledge. This is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the organizations that support them. peer-reviewed🔗 articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree on the standards of ethical behavior expected of all parties involved in the act of publishing: authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, publishers and the society of journals owned or sponsored. The Indian Journal of Software Engineering and Project Management (IJSEPM) strictly adheres to the ethics and policies of:
- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE: https://publicationethics.org/🔗)
- World Association of Medical Editors (WAME: http://www.wame.org/policies🔗)
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE: http://www.icmje.org/journals-following-the-icmje-recommendations/🔗)
- Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT: http://www.consort-statement.org/🔗)
- Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS: https://journals.openedition.org/pistes/6149🔗)
The Guide for Authors and the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement (PEMS) support combined efforts by authors, editors, and reviewers to produce a responsible research publication. All authors must know and keep in mind the Editorial policy and the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. Guidelines for the submission of articles and manuscript preparation and format are to be found on the ‘Guideline for Authors🔗‘ section in the website. Ethics topics to consider when publishing:
- Authorship of the Paper (s): Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
- 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.
- Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.
- 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. Journals do not view the following uses of a work as prior publication: publication in the form of an abstract; publication as an academic thesis; publication as an electronic preprint. Information on prior publication is included within each publication and its journal Guide for Authors.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment.
- Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All submissions must include disclosure of all relationships that could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest.
- 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.
- 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.
- Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: Statements of compliance are required if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, or if it involves the use of animal or human subjects.
- Use of Patient Images or Case Details: Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper.
FEE OR CHARGES FOR AUTHORS
Article Processing Charge (APC) are applicable which is to be found on the ‘Fee Structure | APC Policy🔗‘ section in the website.
Authors are obliged, for all materials submitted, to participate in a peer review process and to follow publication conventions.
All authors are obliged to make the requested changes and correct mistakes. When changes are asked for, the authors have a certain timeline for submitting their modifications. In each case, the authors and reviewers will come to a common understanding of the deadline, based on the nature and quantity of the requested changes. More details about review policy to be found on the ‘Peer Review Policy🔗‘ section in the website.
COPYRIGHT, ACCESS, AND LICENSING
The intellectual property and copyright on the original content of all scientific contributions shall remain with the authors. The authors grant, in exchange for publication in the Journal, exclusive licensing of the first publication, giving the Journal the right to produce and disseminate the contributions, whether collectively with other articles or individually, and in all media forms known or to come.
In confirming the open access publication of their articles, all authors agree to the Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0🔗). More details about copyright, access, and licensing to be found on the ‘Copyright, Grants, Access and Ownership Declaration🔗‘ section in the website.
DATA ACCESS AND RETENTION
Authors may be asked to provide the research data on which their paper is based for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the Journal. Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings. Authors should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable. Authors and researchers are asked to anonymize confidential data and personal information so that they may be accessed.
When submitting, authors are encouraged to join a data statement to their article. In the statement, they can identify the data they used in the article and indicate its availability, for example in a data repository. Authors should be prepared to maintain research data for a reasonable number of years after publication.
Authors are allowed to self-archive articles published in Open Edition Journals in institutional or thematic repositories recognized in their areas.
Open access🔗 is an ongoing publication practice which differs in the way traditional methods of publishing papers to the public get submitted, reviewed, authenticated and finally published. In Open Access publication model🔗 neither readers nor a reader’s institution are charged for access to articles or other resources. Users are free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles (see archive in the journal website) for any non-commercial purpose without requiring a subscription to the journal in which these articles are published. Journal ethics are based on Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)🔗
Journal follows the open access🔗. The publication cost should be covered by the authors institution or research funds. These Open Access charges replace subscription charges and allow the journal to make the valuable published materials freely accessible to all interested online visitors, especially the researchers and young scholars from developing countries.
Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. Journal 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. The Guide for Authors and PEMS support combined efforts by the authors, members of the editorial board and scientific committee, and reviewers to produce a responsible research publication. The international standards for editors and authors are available in the COPE: https://publicationethics.org/search?t=International+Standards🔗
RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH PUBLICATION: AUTHORS RESPONSIBILITIES
The international standards for authors are available in the COPE: https://publicationethics.org/files/International%20standards_authors_for%20website_11_Nov_2011_1.pdf🔗
- The research being reported in articles must be conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and must comply with all relevant legislation, notably the intellectual property. (document of French law no. 92-597 : intellectual property code).
- Authors must be aware of and refrain from engaging in scientific misconduct and by breaching publishing ethics.
- Here after is a list of best ethical practices and common types of misconduct as found is COPE’s Responsible Research Publication : International Standards for Authors.
- Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. The authors shall guarantee the originality of their material as defined in the intellectual property. .
- Authors should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
- Authors should provide appropriate authorship and acknowledgement. Authors must refrain from deliberately misrepresenting a scientist’s relationship with published work. All authors must have significantly contributed to the research. Contributors who have made less substantial contributions to the research or to the publication can be acknowledged, but should not be identified as authors.
- Authors must tell the Journal when they have a direct or indirect conflict of interest with editors or members of the Editorial board or International scientific committee.
- All authors must submit a list of references and financial support if so requested by the editorial board. All sources of research funding, including direct and indirect financial support, should be disclosed.
- No significant part of the article shall have been previously published either as an article or as a chapter, or be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
- If the authors intend to reproduce their article in other publications or for any other purpose and by any means, they must obtain the written authorization of the editorial board.
- Authors shall refrain from engaging in ’salami publication,’ meaning the segmentation of research that would turn one meaningful paper into several different papers.
- Authors are obliged, for all materials submitted, to participate in a peer review process and to follow publication conventions.
- For further information please consult COPE’s guidelines : Responsible Research Publication : International Standards for Authors, https://publicationethics.org/files/International %20standards_authors_for %20website_11_Nov_2011.pdf🔗
- Reporting standards: Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, while editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
- Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.
- Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own, 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.
- Multiple, duplicate, redundant or concurrent submission/publication: Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable. The publication of some kinds of articles (such as clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
- Authorship of the manuscript: Only persons who meet these authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; and (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the “Acknowledgements” section after their written permission to be named as been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Authors should (1) at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript). (2) disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any).
- Acknowledgement of sources: Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
- Hazards and human or animal subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animals or human participants, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them; the manuscript should contain a statement to this effect. Authors should also include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants. The privacy rights of human participants must always be observed.
- Peer review: Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review🔗 process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval, patient consents and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of “revisions necessary”, authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and re-submitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.
- Fundamental errors in published works: When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper. For guidelines on retracting or correcting articles, please see article withdraw policies🔗.
RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH PUBLICATION: EDITORS RESPONSIBILITIES
The international standards for editors are available in the COPE: https://publicationethics.org/files/International%20standard_editors_for%20website_11_Nov_2011_0.pdf🔗
- Publication decision: This journal employs a double-blind review process. All contributions will be initially assessed by the editor. The editor is solely and independently responsible for selecting, processing, and deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal meet the editorial goals and could thus be published. Each paper considered suitable is sent to two independent peer reviewers who are experts in their field and able to assess the specific qualities of the work. The editor is responsible for the final decision regarding whether or not the paper is accepted or rejected. The decision to publish a paper will always be measured in accordance to its importance to researchers, practitioners, and potential readers. Editors should make unbiased decisions independent from commercial considerations. The editor’s decisions and actions are constrained by ethical and legal requirements such as its own PEMS and the intellectual property. governing copyright infringement and plagiarism. Editors who make final decisions about manuscripts should withdraw from editorial decisions if they have conflicts of interest or relationships that pose potential problems concerning articles under consideration. The responsibility of the final decision regarding publication will be attributed to an editor who does not have any conflicts of interest.
- Conflict of interest: The chief editor, members of the editorial board and scientific committee, and reviewers shall withdraw in any case of conflict of interest concerning an author or authors, or the content of a manuscript to be evaluated. The Journal will avoid all conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board and international scientific committee.
- Peer review: Each article submitted is the responsibility of one member of the editorial board or of the international scientific committee, who undertakes to have it evaluated by two peers who are experts in the field and who evaluate it anonymously. Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by editorial board members, members of the international scientific committee, and reviewers.
- Identifying and preventing misconduct: In no case shall a journal and members of the editorial board and international scientific committee encourage misconduct of any kind or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. Members of the editorial board and international scientific committee shall try to prevent misconduct by informing authors and reviewers about the ethical conduct required of them. Members of the editorial board, scientific committee, and reviewers are asked to be aware of all types of misconduct in order to identify papers where research misconduct of any kind has or seems to have occurred and deal with the allegations accordingly.
- Guidelines in case of retraction or corrections:
- Editors’ responsibilities: In case of misconduct, the journal editor is responsible for resolving the issue. He or she can work in conjunction with the other co-editor, members of the editorial board and scientific committee, peer reviewers, and experts in the field.
- Documentation: The issue will be documented accordingly. All factual questions should be documented : who, what, when, where, why. All relevant documents should be kept, in particular the article(s) concerned.
- Due process for authors: The journal editor shall contact the author or publication involved, either the author submitting to journal or another publication or author. The author is thus given the opportunity to respond to or comment on the complaint, allegation, or dispute.
- Data access and retention: Where appropriate, editors encourage authors to share the data that supports research publications. Research data refers to the results of observations or experimentation that validate research findings. Editors encourage authors to state the availability of their data in a data statement attached to the submitted article. With the data statement, authors can be transparent about the data they used in the article.
- Fair play and editorial independence: Editors🔗 evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
- Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff🔗 will 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.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Editors and editorial board members🔗 will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.
- Publication decisions: The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer review🔗 by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief🔗 may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
- Involvement and cooperation in investigations: Editors (in conjunction with the publisher and/or society) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. AP-SMART editors follow the COPE Flowcharts🔗 when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If, on investigation, the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern or other note as may be relevant, will be published in the journal.
- Appropriate corrections: In the event that misconduct has or seems to have occurred, or in the case of needed corrections, the editorial board deals with the different cases by following the appropriate COPE🔗 recommendations. Great care will be taken to distinguish cases of honest human error from deliberate intent to defraud. COPE states that :
- Journal editors should consider retracting a publication if they 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). Retraction is also appropriate in cases of redundant publication, plagiarism, and unethical research.
- Journal editors should consider issuing an expression of concern if : 1) they have reason to believe that there has been research or publication misconduct by the authors but have insufficient evidence, 2) there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case, 3) they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been, or would not be, fair, impartial or conclusive, 4) or an investigation is underway but a judgement will not be available for a considerable time.
- Journal editors should consider issuing a correction if a small portion of an otherwise reliable article proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error), or 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). Source : COPE Retraction Guidelines, https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf🔗 To summarize, the editorial board will consider retracting a publication in case of misconduct, issuing an expression of concern in case of inconclusive proof of misconduct ; or issuing a request for the correction of a misleading segment.
RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH PUBLICATION: REVIEWERS RESPONSIBILITIES
- All reviewers must know and keep in mind the Editorial policy and Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
- The journal requires potential reviewers to have scientific expertise or significant work experience in a relevant field. They must have recently conducted research and/or work and have acquired recognized expertise by their peers. Potential reviewers should provide personal and professional information which is accurate and which gives a fair representation of their expertise.
- All reviewers must likewise withdraw if they know they are unqualified to evaluate a manuscript, if they feel their evaluation of the material will not be objective, or if they understand themselves to be in a conflict of interest.
- Reviewed articles are treated confidentially by reviewers and members of the editorial board and international scientific committee.
- Reviewers should point out relevant published work which has not yet been cited in the reviewed material. If necessary, the editor may issue a correction request to this effect.
- Reviewers are asked to identify papers where research misconduct has or seems to have occurred and inform the editorial board, which will deal with each case accordingly.
- Journal has taken as its model the best ethical practices as found in COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, https://publicationethics.org/files/Ethical_Guidelines_For_Peer_Reviewers_2.pdf🔗.
- Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review🔗 assists editors🔗 in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts. peer review🔗 is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of scientific endeavor. AP-SMART shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to the scientific process have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
- Promptness: Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
- Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
- Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
- Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review🔗 must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH PUBLICATION: PUBLISHER’ RESPONSIBILITIES
- Handling of unethical publishing behavior: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
- Access to journal content: The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.
COPYRIGHT, CONTENT ORIGINALITY, PLAGIARISM, AND REPRODUCTION
- The intellectual property and copyright on the original content of all scientific contributions shall remain with the authors. The authors grant, in exchange for publication in the Journal, exclusive licensing of first publication, giving the Journal the right to produce and disseminate the contributions, whether collectively with other articles or individually, and in all media forms known or to come.
- The authors shall guarantee the originality of their material and shall not publish any text that would appear to contravene, in any way, the definition of originality as given in the intellectual property.
- Plagiarism and false or intentionally misleading declarations constitute behavior that is at odds with the ethics of scientific publication ; as such, they are deemed unacceptable.
- No significant part of the article shall have been previously published either as an article or as a chapter, or be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
- If the authors intend to reproduce their article in other publications or for any other purpose and by any means, they must obtain the written authorization of the editorial board.
- Reproduction of extracts of publications is possible provided that the authors cite their source and have obtained explicit permission from the rights holders, which permission shall not be unduly withheld. Reference must be given to the title of the article, the journal, the author(s), date and place of publication. The Journal reserves the right to apply reproduction rights.
ACCESS, LICENSING AND ARCHIVING
- Articles are published in open access. There are no associated subscriptions or pay-per-view fees.
- All journal material is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0🔗)
- All the journal’s content is archived in several copies by Open Edition, a publisher of online, free-access books and journals. In the event journal is no longer published, Open Edition maintains free access and will continue to make all archives available online.
MULTIPLE, REDUNDANT, SIMULTANEOUS, OR REPEAT PUBLICATIONS
- The authors shall not submit an article already published elsewhere, or a new article founded entirely on work already published. Likewise, the authors shall not make multiple submissions.
- Furthermore, the Journal reserves for itself the right to publish in-house publications and scientific contributions that have already been published and are still relevant. For example, some already published scientific contributions have been republished in an agreement between the Journal and the Portuguese Journal Laboral. The already published articles were translated and appeared in the partnering journal.
- The complete reproduction of journal articles in other publications or for any other purpose and by any means requires the written authorization of the Editor.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
- Members of the Editorial board and reviewers shall withdraw in any case of conflict of interest concerning an author or authors, or the content of a manuscript to be evaluated.
- The Journal shall avoid all conflict of interest between authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board and scientific committee.
- Journal has taken as its model the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Network’s list of situations in which editors and reviewers should withdraw from making decisions.
- There is a direct-reporting relationship between an author and a reviewer.
- There is recent, significant professional collaboration between reviewers and authors.
- An editor or reviewer is a collaborator on the project that is being submitted.
- The editor or reviewer has a financial interest in a company or competing company with a financial interest in the submission.
- The editor or reviewer believes that he or she cannot be objective, whether for personal reasons or due to a financial interest not otherwise covered in the policy. Source: JAMA Network. How Should Journals Handle the Conflict of Interest of Their Editors ? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2623618
- The names of authors, reviewers, and collaborators along with the names of their organizations and institutional affiliations, which the Journal may record in the course of its operations, shall remain confidential and shall not be used for any commercial or public ends beyond the signature of the articles published. However, this information may sometimes be required by government grant-giving bodies. The anonymity of the peer review selection shall be maintained when transmitting this information. A list of the names of authors, reviewers, and collaborators and the names of their organizations and institutional affiliations shall be sent with no explicit links between those named.
- The Journal may use these lists for its own purposes of soliciting articles, collaboration, or other contributions, notably through occasional e-mails. Similarly, it will flag forthcoming issues. Anyone who wishes to stop receiving these e-mails may simply ask to be removed from the list.
- Ethics topics to consider when publishing: