Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by reviewers that are experts in the domain.
Factors that are taken into account in the review include relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
Possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
No submission may be included in more than one publication.

Certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
Certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
Certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
Obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
Notify the Editors of any conflict of interest.
Identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
Report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editor/s.

Keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
Reviews to be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
Reviewers to express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Reviewers call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
Content and overall quality of the publication.
Consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
Ensure the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic report.
Publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
Aware of the research’s funding sources.
To not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
Preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
Ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
Act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
Not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
Not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.