Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Our journal is committed to ethical guidelines based on the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (for more details see: https://publicationethics.org). Conformance to the standards of ethical behaviour is expected of all parties involved: Editorial Boards, Editors, Authors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
The editorial board constantly makes an effort to improve the professional and formal quality of the journal, supports the freedom of speech and plurality of opinions in the field of study. It issues instructions concerning the whole editorial work (instructions for authors, guidelines for peer review process and reviewers etc.) and guarantees observation of the below rules.
Editors (whose work is coordinated by the Editor-in-Chief) are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. They should evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their intellectual content and academic merit. They may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and of the publisher and constrained by such legal requirements, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
Editors must ensure a fair double-blind peer-review of the submitted articles for publication. Articles are first reviewed by editors. They may reject it out of hand either because it is not dealing with the appropriate subject matter (i.e. the subject matter that does not correspond to the specialization of the journal) or because it is manifestly of a low quality so that it cannot be considered at all. Articles that are found suitable for review are then sent to two experts in the field. Referees, who are unknown to each other, are asked to classify the paper as publishable immediately, publishable with amendments and improvements, or not publishable. Referees’ evaluations usually include an explicit recommendation of what to do with the manuscript. Referees’ comments are then seen by the author.
Editors will also ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept as confidential before publishing. They must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and in some instances the editorial board members and the publisher, as appropriate.
Unethical behaviour may be identified and brought to the attention of editors and publisher at any time. Whoever informs editors or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
The authors should ensure that the manuscript is their own, original work. In addition they should ensure that the manuscript has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Submitting a paper simultaneously to more than one journal at a time is a breach of publications ethics.
Authors submitting their manuscripts to the journal for publication as original works confirm that the submitted papers represent their authors’ contributions and have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or in part from other works without clearly citing. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources should be appropriately credited and referenced. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements and plagiarism in all its forms (from ‘passing off’ another’s paper to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without attribution) constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
All articles must be submitted using online submission procedure.
No fees or charges are required from authors for manuscript processing. In submitted manuscripts authors should follow publication and citation praxis of the journal that is available in ‘For authors’ on the webpage of the journal www.aither.eu .
The journal is freely available online. Authors are required to agree with this open access policy which enables unrestricted access.
Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Reviewers perform work for the journal on a volunteer basis and are free to decline invitations to review particular manuscripts at their discretion. Those who feel unqualified or otherwise unable (e.g. because of their workload) to review the paper should notify editors and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are normally expected to submit their reviews within four weeks.
Reviewers should disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
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 editors.
Reviews should be impartial. Comments and observations should provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the authors in improving their work.
Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors and call to editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.