Journal Policy (Policies)

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

As such, this journal follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. In addition, it is expected of authors, reviewers and editors that they follow the best-practice guidelines on ethical behaviour contained therein. 

A selection of key points is included below, but you should always refer to the three documents listed above for full details.

Duties of Editors

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Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent.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 behaviour 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.

Duties of Reviewers

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 endeavour. 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.

Duties of Author(s) and Corresponding Author

Refer to https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1715374115, Each author is expected to have made substantial contributions to the conception OR design of the work; OR the acquisition, analysis, OR interpretation of data; OR the creation of new software used in the work; OR have drafted the work or substantively revised it. AND to have approved the submitted version (and any substantially modified version that involves the author's contribution to the study);

AND to have agreed both to be personally accountable for the author's own contributions and to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work, even ones in which the author was not personally involved, are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature. Authors must ensure:

  1. Originality and Plagiarism Authors must ensure that their work is original and has not been previously published in whole or in part, except as a brief abstract. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Plagiarism in any form, including copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of someone else's work without proper citation, is considered unethical and unacceptable.

  2. Authorship All individuals who have made significant contributions to the research study should be listed as co-authors. 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. Any changes to the author list or order after submission must be agreed upon by all co-authors.

  3. Data Integrity and Transparency Authors should present their research accurately and transparently, providing sufficient detail and supporting data to enable others to verify and replicate their findings. Fabrication, falsification, or selective reporting of data with the intent to deceive or mislead is considered unethical.

  4. Conflict of Interest Authors should disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that may have influenced the research or its interpretation. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, funding, or ownership of stock) that may be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of the manuscript.

  5. Acknowledgment of Sources Authors should properly cite and acknowledge the work of others that has been used in the research. This includes both published and unpublished works. Information obtained privately, such as in conversations, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported without explicit permission from the source.

  6. Ethical Treatment of Human and Animal Subjects If the research involves human or animal subjects, authors must ensure that appropriate ethical guidelines and regulations have been followed. Informed consent must be obtained from human subjects, and the study protocol must be approved by the relevant ethical review board. Details of ethical approval should be provided in the manuscript.

  7. Manuscript Submission and Multiple Submissions Authors should submit their manuscript to only one journal at a time. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals concurrently is considered unethical and a breach of publication ethics.

  8. Errors and Retractions If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, they have an obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with them to correct or retract the paper if necessary.

  9. Peer Review Process Authors should respect the confidentiality and anonymity of the peer review process. They should provide accurate and unbiased information and avoid personal criticism of the reviewers. If authors believe there is a conflict of interest with a particular reviewer, they should notify the editor.

  10. Compliance with Ethical Standards Authors should ensure that their research complies with all relevant ethical standards and guidelines for their field of study. They should adhere to applicable regulations and best practices in research conduct and reporting.

It is important for authors to familiarize themselves with the specific publication ethics policies of the journal they are submitting to, as these may vary between publishers and journals.

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of unethical publishing behaviour

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.

The Submission performed by author, must meet the several Guideliness:

  1. Research Integrity and Ethics
  • Conduct your research with integrity, honesty, and adherence to ethical standards.
  • Obtain necessary ethical approvals for research involving human subjects, animals, or sensitive data.
  • Follow relevant guidelines and regulations for research conduct and reporting in your field.
  1. Manuscript Preparation
  • Follow the journal's guidelines for manuscript preparation, including formatting, citation style, and word limits.
  • Provide a clear and concise title that reflects the content of your research.
  • Include an abstract that summarizes the key objectives, methods, results, and conclusions of your study.
  • Clearly organize your manuscript into sections, such as Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusion.
  • Use accurate and appropriate language, ensuring that your manuscript is free from grammar and spelling errors.
  • Acknowledge and cite the work of others accurately, following the journal's citation style.
  1. Authorship
  • Include as authors only those individuals who have made substantial contributions to the research study.
  • All authors should have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript before submission.
  • Specify the contributions of each author in the manuscript or in a separate authorship statement.
  1. Corresponding Author Responsibilities
  • The corresponding author is responsible for handling communication with the journal throughout the submission, review, and publication process.
  • Provide accurate contact information and promptly respond to all correspondence from the journal.
  • Coordinate and obtain consent from all co-authors regarding manuscript submission, revisions, and responses to reviewer comments.
  • Ensure that any conflicts of interest involving the authors are disclosed to the journal.
  1. Originality and Plagiarism
  • Ensure that your manuscript represents original work and has not been previously published or submitted elsewhere.
  • Cite and acknowledge the work of others appropriately, giving proper credit for their contributions.
  • Avoid any form of plagiarism, including the use of verbatim text without proper citation or paraphrasing without adequate attribution.
  1. Peer Review Process
  • Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and do not disclose or discuss the details of your manuscript with others.
  • Respond to reviewer comments and suggestions constructively, addressing each point raised by the reviewers.
  • Justify and explain any disagreements with reviewer comments, providing clear and evidence-based responses.
  • Revise your manuscript based on the feedback received, ensuring that all requested changes are adequately addressed.
  1. Conflict of Interest
  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence the research, its interpretation, or the publication process.
  • Examples of conflicts of interest include financial relationships, competing interests, or personal relationships with individuals involved in the research or publication.
  1. Corrections, Retractions, and Errata
  • Cooperate with the journal in addressing and correcting any errors, inaccuracies, or discrepancies identified in your published work.
  • If significant errors are discovered after publication, promptly notify the journal and work with them to issue corrections, retractions, or errata as necessary.
  1. Open Access and Copyright
  • Understand and comply with the journal's policies regarding open access, copyright, and licensing options for your manuscript.
  • Consider the implications of different publishing models and choose the most appropriate option for your research.
  1. Funding and Acknowledgments
  • Disclose any funding sources or financial support that contributed to the research or publication of your manuscript.
  • Acknowledge the contributions of individuals or organizations that provided assistance or support during the research process.

Flowchart of Peer Reviewed Publication