Your current position: Home page > Publication Ethic

Publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal has great significance in the formation network of knowledge. We promise to protect author’s rights and ensures that all legal information and copyright regulations are addressed in accordance with the open access policy. To maintain high standards of ethics while publishing articles. Editors, authors, and reviewers involved in the publishing process should perform your responsibilities indicated below and avoid scientific misconduct.


Editors’ Responsibilities

1. The editor of a journal have complete responsibility and authority to make editorial decisions on all peer-reviewed submitted for publication.
2. The editor should treating all authors with fairness, courtesy, objectivity and honesty. All the manuscripts should be assed objectively based on their academic merit free of any commercial or self-interests.
3. The editor shall ensure that the peer review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. Research articles must typically be reviewed by at least three independent reviewers.
4. The editor shall ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
5. The editor shall not disclose any information on submitted manuscripts before publication of the manuscript.
6. The editor shall cooperate with the publisher to describe, implement, and regularly review policies for handling ethical issues and allegations or findings of misconduct by authors and anyone involved in the peer review process.
7. The editor shall be vigilant in avoiding the possibility of editors and/or referees delaying a manuscript for suspect reasons.
8. Developing mechanisms, in cooperation with the publisher, to ensure timely publication of accepted manuscripts.
9. Assigning manuscripts to reviewer by considering their area of expertise and interest.


Reviewers’ Responsibilities

1. Complying with the editor’s written instructions on the journal’s expectations for the scope, content, and quality of the review.
2. Determining scientific merit, originality, and scope of the work; indicating ways to improve it; and recommending acceptance or rejection using whatever rating scale the editor deems most useful.
3. Providing a detailed, constructive, and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the work.
4. Maintaining the confidentiality of the complete review process.
5. Avoiding personal comments or criticism. If reviewers have any interest that might interfere with an objective review, they should either decline the role of reviewer or disclose the conflict of interest to the editor and ask how best to address it.
6. Notifying the journal editor about any financial or personal conflict of interest and declining to review the manuscript when a possibility of such a conflict exists.
7. Notifying the journal editor of any ethical concerns in their evaluation of submitted manuscripts; such as any violation of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or any considerable similarity between the previously published article and any reviewed manuscript.


Author’s responsibility

1. Authors must certify that the work reported in the manuscript is original and free from any kind of plagiarism.
2. Authors must certify that the work have not been published elsewhere or submitted to any other journal(s) at the same time.
3. Authors must disclose any potential conflict of interest associated with the work.
4. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
5. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.

Copyright © 2018 IMR press.