The Journal applies the international standards proposed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as its Member.
1. Ethical Obligations of Authors
When submitting the article into the system the author accepts these standards of publication ethics. Authors are expected to adhere to the following ethical guidelines; infractions may result in the application of sanctions by the Editor(s), including but not limited to the suspension or revocation of publishing privileges.
An author's central obligation is to present an accurate and complete account of the research performed, absolutely avoiding deception, including the data collected or used, as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. Data are defined as information collected or used in generating research conclusions. The research report and the data collected should contain sufficient detail and reference to public sources of information to permit a trained professional to reproduce the experimental observations.
An author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work and that will guide the reader quickly to the earlier work that is essential for understanding the present investigation. Except in a review, the reported research should contain all citations of work the author refers.
In submitting a manuscript for publication, an author guarantees, that the article and any supplemental information submitted therewith (tables, illustrations etc.) are the author’s original work and has not been published in English or any other language. If the article has been published, the author must provide the permission letter of the copyright holder to reprint the article. Therewith, the author confirms, that the submitted paper has not currently been considered for publication anywhere else and will not be submitted for such review while under review by “Economy of Region”.
It is improper for an author to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one journal of primary publication, unless it is a resubmission of a manuscript rejected for or withdrawn from publication. It is generally permissible to submit a manuscript for a full paper expanding on a previously published brief preliminary account ("communication" or "letter") of the same work. However, at the time of submission, the editor should be made aware of the earlier communication, and the preliminary communication should be cited in the manuscript.
Plagiarism is not acceptable in the Journal. Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Authors should not engage in plagiarism – verbatim or near-verbatim copying, or very close paraphrasing, of text or results from another's work. Authors should not engage in self-plagiarism (also known as duplicate publication) – unacceptably close replication of the author's own previously published text, methodology or results without acknowledgement of the source. If one or two identical sentences previously published by an author appear in a subsequent work by the same author, this is unlikely to be regarded as duplicate publication. Material quoted verbatim from the author's previously published work must be placed in quotation marks.
In the case if the Editorial Team receives alert to plagiarism or duplicate publication, or if the publication contains unethical information, the Editor can consider the necessity of the paper’s retraction. The process of retraction includes:
1) An author, reader, reviewer, editor or publisher alerts the Editorial Team of the case of misconduct.
2) The Editorial Board considers and checks this information and make a decision to retract the paper or not. If the paper is to be retracted, the Editor notices the author mentioning the reasons and basis for the retraction.
3) Notices of retraction appear both in the print and electronic versions of the Journal.
4) The paper is retracted from all bibliographic databases, where the Journal is indexed and abstracted.
Conflict of interest
The corresponding author must reveal to the Editor and to the readers of the Journal any potential and/or relevant competing financial or other interest (of all authors) that might be affected by publication of the results contained in the authors' manuscript. Conflicts of interest and sources of funding of the research reported must be clearly stated at the time of manuscript submission and will be included in the published article.
The corresponding author must advise the Editor at the time of submission either that there is no conflict of interest to declare, or should disclose potential conflicts of interest that will be acknowledged in the published article.
Images should be free from misleading manipulation. When images are included in an account of research performed or in the data collection as part of the research, an accurate description of how the images were generated and produced should be provided.
2. Ethical Obligations of Reviewers of Manuscripts
Conflict of interest
A reviewer should disclose real or perceived conflict of interests to the Editor before agreeing to write a review. Examples include, but are not restricted to, past (within the last 5 years) or current collaboration, personal friend, employer or employee, family relationship, institutional relationship, past or present graduate advisor or advisee, someone with whom the reviewer has had a past or on-going scientific controversy, or situations where the reviewer could stand to gain economically by publication or rejection of the manuscript. The Editor will decide if the conflict is severe enough to prevent the reviewer from writing a fair, objective review.
A reviewer should decline to review a manuscript if she/he feels technically unqualified, if a timely review can't be done.
Reviewers should treat the manuscript as confidential. Only the Editorial Team knows the names and contacts of the reviewer/
Discussion with a third party
Reviewers should ask the Editor for permission to discuss the paper with others for specific advice, giving names and reasons for such consultation. Reviewers should not pass the manuscript to another to carry out the review without permission from the Editor.
Using the data
Reviewers should not use information, data, theories, or interpretations of the manuscript in their own work until that manuscript is in press or published unless the author has given permission to do so.
Reviewers should clearly support and justify the basis for their review analysis.
Plagiarism and Duplication Detection
Reviewers should alert the Editor to similar manuscripts published or under consideration for publication elsewhere in the event they are aware of such. However, it is the responsibility of the Editor, not the reviewer, to decide on the proper course of action once so informed.