Guidelines

I. EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES

Publication Decisions: Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals and must  strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be base on the editorial board’s reviews and paper’s importance.

Review of Manuscripts: The editor must  ensure  that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that journals and sections within journals will have different aims and standards.

Fair Review: Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely. The editor ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc.

Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must 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. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.

II. AUTHOR’S RESPONSIBILITIES

Reporting Standards: Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance with the submission guidelines of the articles. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality: Authors must certify that their work is unique and original.

Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.

Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.

III. REVIEWERS RESPONSIBILITIES

Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor,  and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should provide guidance to the reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.

Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within the stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.

Conflict of Interest: All reviewers should have no conflict of interest concerning the research, the authors and the funding bodies.

IV. CHANGE OR MODIFICATION OF PUBLISHED PAPER

Withdrawal: Papers published will be withdrawn if the author(s) noticed significant errors. Before accepting withdrawal request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with the author(s) sufficiently. If the paper was agreed to be withdrawn, the following would be implemented:

• The paper in the journal database will be removed.
• The link in online publication site will be removed.
• Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).

Replacement: Papers published can be replaced if the author(s) send an updated paper. Before accepting replacement request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with the author(s) sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the advances. If the paper were agreed to be replaced, the following would be implemented:

• The paper in the journal database will be replaced.
• The link in online publication site will be replaced.
• Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was replaced because the author(s) sent an updated Contact editor if you want to check old version).
• Old version should be kept separately, and if someone wants to check the old version, the editor can send the PDF to him/her.
• Note that the replacement is acceptable only one time, and only for technical advances.

Removal: Papers published will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers or other subjects noticed significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently and should provide enough time to have the authors’ explanation. If the paper was agreed to be removed, the following would be implemented:

• The paper in the journal database will be removed.
• The link in online publication site will be removed.
• Next phrase or similar phrase stating the reason will be shown below the paper title in the Table of Contents and journal volume page: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).

V. PENALTIES

Double Submission: If the double submission was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as an intentional thing,

• The review process will be terminated.
• The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors.
• All authors’ name will be marked as blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all NADIA journals for three years.

Double Publication: If the double publication was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the double publication was confirmed as an intentional thing,

• It will be reported to editorial board and author(s).
• It will be sent to publisher published a same (or very similar) paper.
• Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in Section 4.
• All authors’ name will be marked as blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all NADIA journals for three years.

Plagiarism: If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was found or noticed from other sources, the editorial board should check the status. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as an intentional thing,

• It will be reported to the editorial board and authors.
• It will be sent to publisher published a same or similar paper.
• Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in Section 4.
• All authors’ name will be marked as blacklist, and these authors cannot submit any paper to all NADIA journals for five years.

All the Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the NADIA agrees upon standards of proper ethical behaviour and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

Reference: Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).

I. QUALITY

• Papers must be double-blind refereed according to the support society’s strict standards. If one referee accepts the paper and one rejects it, the decision of the third referee is final. Guest Editors should retain the referees’ reports until the paper has been published. The publisher reserves the right to re-referee and/or reject an accepted paper if the paper does not meet the criteria outlined in the review form or if the paper is in some other way deemed unsuitable.
• Also, there should be a balance of papers internationally and topically, and account must be taken from  the status and credibility of the research centers from where the submitted papers are accepted and published.

II. CONFERENCE PAPERS

It is not unusual for papers to be submitted that are based on conference papers, which may have been published elsewhere. These papers  require special care. It is important to observe the following in considering submissions based on those

• If the original conference paper has been published elsewhere, or the copyright has been assigned to the conference organizers or another party, the Author is required  to ensure that he/she has cleared any necessary permission with the copyright owner in the original. Paper submitted to the journal will not be accepted unless such permissions have been obtained.
• The submitted paper must be substantially revised, expanded and rewritten so that it is significantly different from the conference paper or presentation on which it is based. The paper must be sufficiently different to make it a new, original work.  This is unlikely to be the case if less than 50% of the paper is clearly new. This is a matter of judgment that should be based on a comparison of the submitted paper with the original conference paper.
• The paper must contain a statement fully acknowledging the original conference paper:

This paper is a revised and expanded version of a paper entitled [conference paper title] presented at [name, location and date of conference].

III. SUBMISSION GUIDELINES

All accepted papers will be published online, and the electronic copy will be send to the author later. Authors should submit paper with about 10 to 18 pages by using online systems of respective journal.

Paper Format:

https://nadiapub.com/Guidelines/NADIA%20PaperFormat(MS-Word).doc

• 2-3 months for invited authors to submit the first draft of their papers;
• 1-2 months for the refereeing process and to inform the authors of the outcome of the refereeing process and of any changes requested by the referees.
• 1 month for authors to resubmit the final manuscript of their papers after incorporating any changes requested by the referees.

IV. REVIEW PROCESS

1. Initial Screening

All submitted and invited papers should go through an initial screening process to screen  papers which are not suitable or has have different focus, papers which are marginal, weak papers, etc. Only relevant and of high quality  papers should be processed and sent to referees (we do not want to waste the time of the referees by sending poor or marginal papers to them). Send every paper which passes the initial screening process to be refereed by three experts.

2. Refereeing Process:

• If two referees accept the paper, the paper is then considered for selection. However, if they accept the paper BUT the paper only scored marginal or just acceptable for Originality, Quality, Relevance, Presentation and Recommendation then the paper is not up to the standard of the journal and the editor should reject it.
• If two referees reject the paper, the paper is rejected and the authors are informed.
• If two referees disagree, then the third referee’s decision is final.

Editor-in-Chief may reject papers which have been rejected by referees but cannot send acceptance letters to authors until the selected papers for the special issue and their refereeing reports have all been reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief.

V. PUBLICATION PROCESS

The Publisher reserves the right to make a final review, i.e. final acceptance of the papers is subject to this final review process which is a part of the publisher’s quality assurance process before publication.

The final manuscript of each selected paper should include:

• Title of the paper, names of authors, their affiliations, complete addresses and e mail addresses.
• The name, address, email address and fax number of the corresponding author to whom the proof of the typeset paper should go to for checking.
• A brief abstract.
• High quality and high resolution figures suitable for printing high quality figures in black and white.
• Each paper must have the NADIA Author Agreement (Copyright form) completed by the author. If a paper has more than one author, the corresponding author must be responsible to sign the Copyright form.

If papers have been refereed and accepted and sent for typesetting, the authors have to abide by what they have written; no further changes are acceptable in:

• Author’s details (e.g. adding more names or deleting names) or in their sequence
• The content of the paper (except for typesetting corrections)

If authors wish to make changes to content, then the paper has to be withdrawn and must go back to be refereed as a new paper. If there is any dispute about authorship or intellectual property, the paper must be withdrawn completely from publication until the authors settle their legal claims. It is not the publisher’s responsibility to solve or interfere in any intellectual property dispute.

VI. TYPESETTING

• When the papers for the special issue are accepted by the final review process, the papers are processed for typesetting and all the succeeding publication processes will be conducted by the publisher.
• The corresponding author of each paper will receive by email the proof of his/her paper to check. He/she must return the corrected proofs within seven days in order to avoid any delays in publishing the special issue. If the research society has not received a response by then, the research society will contact Guest Editors to help chase the author for a reply.
• After having their corrections incorporated by the typesetter, the proofs will again be sent to authors to check and to ensure that all their corrections are included. It is the responsibility of authors to check and correct the proofs of their papers. Papers cannot be published until they are checked and approved by authors. And papers cannot be amended once they are published, except in very exceptional circumstances, so authors should take great care in approving the final version for publication.

VII. AUTHOR ENTITLEMENT AND POSTPRINT PERMISSION

The author/s will received a PDF file of their published paper. Hardcopies of journal issues may be purchased at a special price for authors. The Journal will also permit the Author to use the Article for non-commercial purposes after publication:

1. Using the Article for further research and in courses that the Author is teaching provided acknowledgement is given to the Journal as the original source of publication.
2. Posting the Accepted Version (final post-acceptance manuscript version) on the author’s personal web pages or in an institutional repository maintained by the institution to which the Author is affiliated, provided acknowledgement is given to the Journal as the original source of publication and upon condition that it shall not be accessible until after 4 months from NADIA publication date).
3. Incorporating the Article content in other works by the Author, provided acknowledgement is given to the Journal as the original source of publication.

In all cases, full acknowledgement in the form of a full citation must be given to the Journal as the original source of publication, together with a link to the Journal web page and/or DOI.

VIII. COPYRIGHT AND AUTHOR RIGHTS

NADIA is a publisher that provides monthly publication of articles in all areas of Science, Technology, Engineering, Healthcare and Education. Aims to foster innovative scientific research, eminent knowledge and become a prominent contributor to the research communities and societies. In all that we do, we work to ensure the widest possible access to the articles that we publish, to enhance the reputation of the author, the journal, its editor and editorial board, and the value that we add as publisher in both printed and online form. The transfer of copyright is standard practice in journal publishing. It also enables us to defend and enforce authors’ rights against plagiarism, copyright infringement, unauthorized use and, most important for authors’ professional reputation, breach of authors’ moral rights.

The form can be downloaded from the website at:

https://nadiapub.com/Guidelines/NADIA%20Journal%20Copyright%20Form.pdf

IX. SPECIAL SECTIONS

This journal will also publish scientific news and views, reports, commentary, technical comments, research highlights, science and technology features and perspectives, business, book reviews, jobs, etc., at the discretion of Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors. Authors are advised to cite proper and correct sources for news, research highlights, etc.

X. JOURNAL POLICY

It is Journal policy to publish only original and unpublished research work therefore Journal does not wish to receive any papers on research work that has already been reported in parts or contains already published text, data, figures, tables or other illustrations or any copyright materials whatsoever that has been submitted or accepted for publication either in a journal or conference proceedings elsewhere in any form, in print or in electronic media. When submitting a manuscript, authors should make a full statement to the Editors that the research work contained in their manuscript is completely original and unpublished. If redundant or duplicate publication is attempted or occurs authors should expect immediate editorial action to be taken including prompt rejection of the submitted manuscript. Submission of any manuscript that contains redundant or duplicate publication of the same or very similar research work violates the policies of this journal.

XI. ETHICAL COMPLIANCE

Research papers reporting animal or clinical studies should, where appropriate, contain a statement that they have been carried out with animal or human ethics committee approval. All scientific studies should be carried out in accordance with the relevant national and local guidelines. Each author(s) warrants that his or her research institution has fully approved the protocol for all scientific studies involving animals or humans and that all experiments of any kinds were conducted in compliance with ethical and humane principles of research after ethics committee approval.

I. EDITORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES

• Gives the publisher an efficient way to manage his article by eliminating concerns on grammar and sentence construction.
• Allows the publisher to attract more smart readers by presenting the grammatically correct and interesting articles.
• Creates good reputation on the part of the publishing company since the articles are written well and the edited by the good set of editors.
• Makes the publisher reliable source of written articles and builds authority to the publisher through the written articles.
• Take charge of the publications content.
• Check the manuscript against in any form of plagiarism.
• Considers the content of publications based on the publisher’s style, policy and requirements.
• Verifies the factual data and statistics based on the reliable sources.
• Reviews and approves the proof submitted by writers.

II. EDITORS’ BENEFITS

A well written article reflects the expertise of an editor. When an article speaks with authority, it means a good editor behind that work. The benefits of an editor are as follows:

• The advantage of meticulously analyzing relevant data and verifying the truthfulness of the matter. In short, they become more knowledgeable and analytical on a certain topic. As such, you can be a good authority also on such matters either as an editor, writer or speaker.
• Also, as part of the editorial board, you obtain a higher level of preference and authority on what to include in particular publication content. Your published works can be a novel a source of information for wide-readers and has the great possibility of being cited on related literatures or relevant researchers.
• The career path of an editor at the start can be competitive yet once you happily do your job, your career leads to one successful publication to another bigger publication projects. In essence, as an editor one creates his own career path depending on his editing skills. The better editor gets the better wait him.
• The editorial board members or reviewers will receive an automatic 20% discount to publish their article in NADIA Journals.

III. EDITORS’ AGREEMENT

The acceptance of following terms and conditions confirms your appointment as a member on editorial board or reviewer of journals of NADIA Journal.

• The publisher has the right to appoint you as Managing Editor, Associate Editors or Editorial Review Board base on your submitted CV.
• Your appointment is valid for three years.
• You are expected to observe carefully general policies, code of ethics and practices of the NADIA Publication which may change from time to time based on expansion plans for the improvement in quality of the journal system.
• You are required to fill-out the Editorial Board Application Form and provide the necessary information and send to [email protected].
• You agree to display your name and photograph on the website of the site and journal cover.

IV. EDITORS’ TERMINATION

It is expected that you will complete the term as stated. This agreement may be terminated at any time based on following conditions.

• Lack of mutual understanding on common aspects as per the policies of NADIA Publication.
• Repetitive unsatisfactory performance of the assigned work.

• The implementation of peer review is to guarantee that only respectable knowledge is published. It is an objective procedure at the core of noble scholarly publication and is carried out by all reputable scientific journals.
• Initial manuscript evaluation The Editor first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but an exceptional manuscript can be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are insufficiently original, have serious scientific flaws, have poor grammar or English language, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are normally passed on to at least 2 experts for review.
• Type of Peer Review Policy employs is double-blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
• The time required for the review process is dependent on the response of the referees. Should the referee’s reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. The Editor, decisions at this stage to accept, reject or ask the author for a revision are made based on only one referee’s report.
• The Editor’s decision will be sent to the author with recommendations made by the referees, which usually includes verbatim comments by the referees. Revised manuscripts might be returned to the initial referees who may then request another revision of a manuscript.
• The review consists of 7 components: (1) Interest of the topic to the readers, (2) Originality and novelty of the ideas, (3) Importance of the proposed ideas, (4) Sufficient information to support the assertions made and conclusions drawn, (5) Quality of writing(Organization, clarity, accuracy), (6) English Grammar, and (7) References and citation (up-to-date, appropriate, sufficient). Associated with each of the above 7 parts should be a rating from very high, high, average, low, very low.

Peer Review Process