ETHICAL STANDARDS

For any peer-reviewed journal, the publication of articles plays an essential role in the development of a coherent network of knowledge. It is, therefore, essential that all publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers, in the process of publishing the journals, conduct themselves in accordance with the highest level of professional ethics and standards. In the publication copy right agreement authors warrant that their work is original and has not been published elsewhere. All parties are also expected to conform to common standards of professional respect and civility. The publisher is dedicated to supporting the vast efforts of the editors, the academic contributions of authors, and the respected volunteer work undertaken by reviewers. The publisher is also responsible for ensuring that the publication system works smoothly, and that ethical guidelines are applied to assist the editor, author, and reviewer in performing their ethical duties.

1. ETHICAL EXPECTATIONS

• Editors’ responsibilities

An editor is a publication's editorial leader, having final responsibility for all operations and policies. Once an article is received then the editor forward it to the reviewers based on the subject and specialization of the article without focusing on affiliation of authors, genders, religious and origin of authors. 
Editors are responsible for everything published in their journals. They should:

• Full fill all the expectations of authors, readers and reviewers;
• Ensure the standard and quality of the material they publish;
• Solve all the queries, clarifications, corrections or complaints posted by authors;
• Maintain high confidentiality and integrity among the authors;
• Ensure that they have presented original and novel work and also taken care to quote the appropriate citations.
• Provide sufficient time to the authors to reflect the required modifications indicated by the reviewers;
• Ensure before publishing any article, whether all the modifications indicated by the reviewers are reflected or not. 

• Reviewers’ responsibilities

• Evaluate each manuscript for its intellectual content without regard to race, gender, age, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, political philosophy, citizenship, domicile or institutional affiliation of the authors.
• Detailed examination and relevance of the manuscript as per author guidelines.
• Careful examination of purpose and objectives of the work carried out.
• Correctness of the conclusions and recommendations along with up-to-date references.
• Copyediting and proofreading of the manuscripts in a accordance with publishing standards especially with grammar, punctuation and spelling.
• Coverage areas of the manuscript in relevance with the scope of journal.
• Plagiarism related issues if any.
• Reviewers have to give at least six suggestions and based on the structure of the manuscript.
• Reviewers have complete authority to accept or reject manuscripts but final decision in case of sensitive titles about the inclusion or exclusion from the publications remains in the hands of Editor-In-Chief.

• Authors’ responsibilities

1. All manuscripts should be written in good English. This is the responsibility of the authors, not the editors. Papers below the standard for the Journal will be returned to the authors for rewriting and can be rejected for this reason alone.
2. As the author of the submitted work, it is your responsibility to ensure that the manuscript presents a technically as well as grammatically correct copy. A well-prepared manuscript will help to speed up the peer review process as less time will be spent by reviewers annotating technical inefficiencies of the paper and more time evaluating the intellectual content.

3. Authors must describe the role of research study sponsor(s), if any in study design, in collection, analysis and interpretation of data, in writing of the report and decision to submit the paper for publication.

4. In order to comply with data protection and privacy rules, each individual who appears in any photograph or image, must be made aware about such inclusion.

5. If it is observed that articles are breaking professional ethics, are submitted to another journals and contains fraud in case of authorship with plagiarized content; in such cases they are directly removed from the online website and authors will be black listed and will not be allowed to publish in future publications.

6. Authors should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective and discussion of its significance.

7. A paper should contain sufficient details about all the points, sub points along with references to permit others to replicate the work.

8 .The authors should ensure that they have presented original and novel work and also taken care to quote the appropriate citations.

9.Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

10.Author should not replicate the general research data and should try to avoid the similarities with previously published articles to keep novelty and originality.

2. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR

Identification of unethical behavior

·     Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone along with the evidences of such events. In turn the editor is responsible to take necessary and serious action and the same shall be informed to the concerned author as well.

Outcomes  

• Formal retraction or withdrawal of a publication from the journal, in conjunction with informing the head of the author or reviewer’s department, Abstracting & Indexing services and the readership of the publication.
• Publication of a formal notice detailing the misconduct.
• A more strongly worded letter may be sent to the author or reviewer covering the misconduct and as a warning to future behavior.
• Informing or educating the author or reviewer where there appears to be a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards.
•  A formal letter may be sent to the head of the author’s or reviewer’s department or funding agency.
•  Reporting the case and outcome to a professional organisation or higher authority for further investigation and action.