Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 

Malpractice Statement

ResearchersLinks, UK, believes that research must be conducted according to the full and appropriate ethical agenda, universally acceptable to the research community. Any issue associated to the publication ethics will be handled seriously at the Editorial Office and, if proven, ResearchersLinks reserves the right to reject the manuscript and may contact the ethics committee or the concerning committee of the author’s institutions for appropriate actions. If authors want to retract articles, they should inform the Editorial Office with a retraction letter explaining the reason. Authors also reserve the right to appeal against the Editor's decision on the manuscript in writing to the Editorial Office. ResearchersLinks accepts papers not for business or political gain but on intellectual and ethical standards only. The Editorial Office will also strictly monitor for plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the processing of the manuscript for review process and, if plagiarism is detected at this stage or latter, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published, independently or in-association, by the ResearchersLinks, UK.

 

Publication Ethics

Publication of scientific contents is meticulous, methodical and comprehensive processes that involve good ethical and managmental practices. To effectively maintain high publication standards, ResearchersLinks strives to work with editors, authors, peer-reviewers and copy editors.

The publication ethics attributed to all journals of ResearchersLinks are based on the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct (Comprehensively described at www.publicationethics.org) (ResearchersLinks is not yet member of COPE). These publication ethics are briefly described to provide a snapshot for authors, reviewers, editors and readers.

1. Author’s Responsibilities
2. Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities
3. Reviewers Responsibilities
4. Publisher/Copy Editor Responsibilities
5. Recording Complaints

 

 

Author’s Responsibilities

 

Authorship: authorship should be attributed to personnel with significant contribution to the study, manuscript drafting, and holding responsibility for the authenticity. General supervision, or financial support shall not suffice the authorship. Contribution of each author shall clearly be stated and contributing authors shall not be changed without prior written consent from the existing authors.

Acknowledgement of Funding Sources: All authors shall fairly and clearly state the portion of the studies funded, supported or sponsored by any of the government, non-government or personal sources.

Conflicts of Interest/Disclosures: authors are required to declare any financial, academic, commercial, political or personal conflicts before the publication of the manuscript.

Data Ownership and Access: authors are expected to clarify the ownership, appropriate access and full understanding of the data being presented in the submitted manuscripts.

Reporting Standards: it is essential that authors are aware of international standards on the publications, and are professional and authorised to conduct studies on living objects. Moreover, authors are expected to be fully aware of practices for multiple, redundant or concurrent publications and their mitigations consequences.

Ethical Approvals: In cases where animals are used in the submitted manuscript, the methods section must clearly indicate approval from the ethics committee of the institute or organisation and should state that all efforts were taken to minimize pain and discomfort to the animal while conducting these experiments.

Ethics of Investigation: Authors should make sure that the manuscript is designed according to the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration as revised in 1975, otherwise the manuscript will not be accepted for publication or will be rejected later.

Permissions: In case any part (e.g. table or figure) of the submitted manuscript has been taken from previously published work, it is the responsibility of the authors to obtain permission either from the publishers or from the authors depending on the copyright ownership. ResearchersLinks can demand this permission anytime, pre- or post-publication of the study.

Originality and Plagiarism Policy: The Editorial Office will strictly monitor text plagiarism and obvious fraudulent data prior to the review process and if plagiarism is detected at this stage or later, the manuscript will be rejected and will not be reconsidered in any journal published independently or in association with ResearchersLinks, UK.

Appeal of Decision: Authors have the right to appeal the Editor's decision in writing to the Editorial Office stating the reasons for appealing the decision with evidence and supporting data.

 

 

Editor/Associate Editors/Editorial Members Responsibilities

 

Editorship: Editors (chief editor, associate editor or member of the editorial board) are expert in the field and play central roles in the peer-review process. Editors are selected based on their excellent scientific qualification, and reputation in the field. They are expected to strictly follow guidelines to not only maintain quality of publications but also to ensure best possible publication ethics.

Confidentiality: Editors shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.

Assessment of Manuscripts: Editors shall evaluate contents purely based on the scientific quality and advancement in the existing understanding. Decisions shall not be based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity and on any other personal or commercial interests.

Flexibility and Cooperation: Editors are required to suggest and support the ethical standards, be willing to consider retractions, rectifications, and erratum and cooperate with authors to improve the quality of publications.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors shall not consider any submitted manuscript for the review process himself/herself where there is conflict of interests. In such situations, an alternative associate editor or member of the editorial board shall be considered.

Accountabilities: In case publisher suspect any form of misconduct, malpractice or unethical act, the matter shall be investigated promptly in agreement with authors and would be solved with diligence.

 

 

Reviewers Responsibilities

 

Reviewership: reviewers are essential part of the peer-review process and are important benchmarks for quality publications. Although sometimes tedious and time consuming, reviewing a manuscript is also a privilege.

Pre-acceptance Obligations: Reviewers are expected to only accept to review the manuscript when the scope of the research/study falls within his/her areas of expertise and that they have sufficient time to submit the report timely.

Conflict of Interest and Willingness: Reviewers shall decline to review the manuscript if there is any conflict of interest, the study is beyond the ken of knowledge or they are unable to submit the evaluation in time. They shall notify the editors at their earliest convenience and can/shall suggestive alternative reviewers.

Confidentiality: The journal follow single-blinded review in which names of the reviewers are not disclosed to authors, however, reviewers are aware of authors and their affiliations. Reviewers shall only access the submitted manuscripts for evaluation of quality and peer-review process. They shall not disclose any contents (full or partial) in any media (electronic or print) before the publication of the material or without prior written consent of the authors. Any idea or concept generated through the submitted manuscript shall not be used for personal benefits or financial gain.

Objectivity: Reviewers are requested to comments on scientific contents, appropriateness of the study and value of the outcome. They are requested to not to assess the manuscripts based on race, gender, geographical origin, religion, and ethnicity and on any other personal or commercial interests.

Meeting Standards: Reviewers shall adhere to the criteria set by the journal in the online portal. Any comments on competing interests, duplication of publication, unethical practice or dubious act shall be conducted to the editor in the “confidential comments to the Editor” section in the online submission system.

 

 

Publisher/Copy-Editor Responsibilities

 

Involvement and Cooperation in the Peer-Review Process: We are committed to bridge all components of peer-review process for delivery of quality publications and benefiting researchers. Our all advertisements, reprinting, or other commercial interests shall not effect the decision of the editors, associate editors, and reviewers.

Article Withdrawal and Corrections to the Record: The published articles may be considered for withdrawal if proven to be plagiarised, presenting fake, duplicate or fraudulent data, or showing clear evidences of infringements of ethical codes. Such articles (html, pdf, epub, eflip) will be replaced by the content stating the withdrawal of the manuscripts. Minor errors such as typos, textual changes, or clearer statements on the existing contents will be published as corrections.

Integrity and Quality of Services: We will ensure that all contents are confidential before publication, meeting standard of archiving and abstracting and timely publication of the accepted manuscripts.

 

 

Recording Complaints

 

In case of any concern that dictates unethical practice, misuse of data or deviation from individual’s responsibilities, it is requested to write us at [email protected] or fill this short online form for prompt actions.