Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
IJCIAR is committed to publish quality of the research work and to promote the quality research Editors, Reviewers; Authors should follow the ethical principles as follows.
For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics statements for our journal are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
Peer Review Process
Peer review process is the system used to assess the quality of the manuscript before it is considered for publication in our Journal. In peer review process we send the article for evaluation for subject experts in the relevant scientific field to assess the submitted manuscript/article for their originality, academic standards, importance, technical contents methodology, ethical nature and finally quality and suitability of the journal. All manuscripts are subjected to double bind peer review process which will be completed in one week and final decision will be taken by Editor-in-Chief/Associate Editor of IJCIAR.
After review process, possible decisions on a manuscript are:
A. Accept the manuscript as submit (with routine editing)
B. Accept the manuscript with suggested revisions
C. Possibly accept after extensive revision of the manuscript
D. Reject the article/manuscript
If minor revision is required, authors should return a revised version as soon as possible within 15 days. If major revision is required, authors should return a revised version within 25 days.
Duties of the Editors-In-Chief
Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The Editor-in-Chief 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.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an Editor’s own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s).
The handling Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The Editor-in-Chief of IJCIAR may be guided by the policies of the journal’s Editorial Board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Duties of Peer Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. 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 data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and Conflict Of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating 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 submission.