IJFGCN Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

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.

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.

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.

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).

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).