Apertus Journals strictly work with the highest standards of publication ethics; practices and policies to maintain zero tolerance towards misconduct and in the handling of cases in investigation and publication, using the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics.
We instruct authors, reviewers, and editors monitor the following duties:
- The Journal Editors are responsible for monitoring and assuring the standards of the peer review process its timeliness, dedication, and courtesy.
- He/She shall evaluate the submissions on the basis of merits, without taking into account the geographical and demographic parameter.
- The editor assesses the publication of the manuscripts objectively, regardless of race, religion, gender, seniority, ethnicity, political affiliation, institutional ties or nationality. The editors must refrain from their duties where there is a potential conflict of interest.
- The Editors can communicate with other editors or reviewers when making a final decision.
- The decisions to publish the peer-reviewed manuscript are taken independently of each other by the Editors, without any internal or external pressure from publishers, authorities or other institutions means they have the right to accept or reject any article.
- The Editor is the highest authority and responsibility for all published content and manuscripts.
- Editors should not disclose the information about the content of the unpublished manuscript or the authors involved for the benefit of any person or organization.
- The Editor will take the appropriate measures against unethical conduct found during the process. The case of suspicious and unethical behavior should be addressed and the necessary measures enforced.
- Editors must ensure every submission shall undergo a peer-review process and at least two expert reviewers should consider/accept the peer-reviewed manuscript.
- Editors must ensure that the document is sent to the reviewers do not contain information of the author.
- The Editors will be guided by the Guidelines for the R of Articles of COPE when considering revocation, expressing concern and making corrections to published articles.
- Editors must respect the author’s request that the order should not be checked by any other person for any reason whatsoever.
- Reviewers majorly contribute the journal in the peer review process in decision making of the manuscripts and also guide authors in publishing the manuscript, Reviewers need to contribute fairly in the peer-review process.
- Reviewers must inform the editors in advance of the unavailability, or insufficient expertise to review if a manuscript is assigned in which the reviewer is not proficient; they should reject the invitation or return to the manuscript to an Editor.
- Reviewers are only required to review manuscripts in which they are experts; reviewers are not permitted to share or use the content of the manuscript they review, for individual or organizational gain.
- The review process should take place independently with any internal or external pressure without any internal or external pressure from publishers, authorities or other institutions.
- All decisions or remarks should be rightly supported with evidence and supporting data and documents so that Authors can improve their manuscript using them.
- Reviewers should not be unethical, criticize authors while providing the feedback of the manuscript.
- Reviewers should not be receiving and reviewing the manuscript if there is a potential conflict of interest between them and the author.
- If the authors wish to undergo the open review process, each concern assign reviewer should agree that review comments are available on the website along with the author’s responses to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY license.
- The authors are supposed to be responsible for the content and information in their manuscripts.
- The author should maintain transparency while reporting in order to minimize problems. Duplicate manuscripts, inaccurate statements that represent unethical publishing behavior are not accepted and in such cases, strong measures will be taken.
- Authors must submit a statement that their research has received ethical approval (or a statement that this was not required and why) and that participants have given appropriate approval for their research.
- To make the best decisions on how to proceed with a manuscript, authors need to share details of competing interests; this includes any commercial, financial or non-financial associations that may be relevant to the submitted article.
- The authors are solely responsible for the submission of questionable manuscripts if the author finds any misconduct in the article; the journal has the right to conduct an investigation in accordance with the COPE guidelines and can intervene immediately on the article and on the authors.
- In the case of human experiments, the authors state that the study is in accordance with the ethical standards of the Helsinki Declaration, which guides the human experiment. If there is any doubt as to whether the study complies with the Declaration, the author must explain this.
- In the case of animal experiments, the author has certified that the author has followed the guidelines and abroad with regard to animal experiments in the laboratory.
- Salami’ publication is prohibited in Apertus Journals.