Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice – IJARESM PUBLICATION, INDIA
Hereunder are clearly spelt-out ethical behaviour that are expected from the Editor, Associate Editors, Editorial Board Members and Reviewers to our journals. These are to guide in keeping to the professional requirement in publishing and hence the extention of frontier of knowledge
Editor’s/Associate Editor’s spelt-out duties
Once the Editor/Associate Editor receives a manuscript, the same is reponsible for the first examination of the manuscript in terms of relevance and content. Based on this, the manuscript could be rejected outrightly or passed to reviewers for comments after assigning a number to the manuscript.
The review reports of commnents provide guidance for the Editor to decide on the suitability or otherwise of the article under consideration; this will be in terms of acceptance or rejection of the same.
The journal operates a blind review in which both the reviewer and authors do not know each other. However in certain instances, the author(s)’ identity could be made known to the reviewer if the reviewer feells that thtis is need.
The Editor maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript at all time.
The Editor normally send the manuscript out to cometent reviewer who looks at the intellectual metrit of the same and provide comments.
Author(s) spelt-out duties
The Author(s) must guarantee that the manuscript submitted to us has not be previously published or submitted elsewhere for publication. However, the author could submit the paper elsewhere if it is rejected by IJARESM Publications Journals.
There should be a guatrantee from the Authors that the work is original and approval of the affiliations of the Author(s) has been given to publish the paper, if needed. Also that all authors whose names appear in the manuscipt gave their concents to the inclusion of the names and the order in which the names have been presented for publication.
Concerning experiments, the Authors should provide, if required more facts or data that may be asked for to authenicate the results being presented.
Plagiarism is a serious offence, and authors must guarantee that the work does not contain any plagiarised material.
It is the Reviewer’s duty to keep all information about the manuscript confidential at all times.
Relevant papers that are significant to the study may be suggested by the reviewer for the improvement of the manuscript.
Reviewer needs to make sure that all sources of date used in the manuscript are duly referenced in the work. Thus, if a reviewer observes that these is similarity in the work being evaluated and another work that the Reviewer has read before, report should be made to the Editor.
The review should be done professionally with a brief of what the study is about and stating the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as well as the Reviewer’s opinion about the manuscript.