Editorial Policy and Ethical Principles

 

Aim and objectives:

The aim of the collection of scientific works «Socio-Economic Research Bulletin» is to publish the promising scientific research results in an economics field, and also the main results of scientific degrees applicants’ dissertations.

Our editorial policy aims to attract a wide range of Ukrainian and foreign experts and researchers for discuss actual questions of the economy and economic development, global socio-economic problems and find ways to solve them.

Guided by the requirements of international scientific community and high publication standards, the editorial board of the collection of scientific works «Socio-Economic Research Bulletin» prefers original scientific research and also strives to achieve the following objectives:

• The best international publishing practices observance and dissemination.
• The modern expert scientific information-analytical environment formation.
• Ukrainian scientific research promoting and competitive developments creation for international market of scientific products.
• The progressive business models of open scientific communication promoting the creation, Ukrainian science integration into European and international scientific field, and also modern digital research infrastructures.
• The global open science initiatives supporting and modern opportunities using, which provided by the digital landscape (European Open Science Cloud (EOSC), Initiative for Open Citations), etc.
• Formation of a reputable reviewers team from different countries, representatives of various areas of economic research with a high scientific rating.
• Ensuring transparency of peer review standards.
• Abidance of international standards of publishing ethics, anti-corruption standards among authors of publications (combating with unfair citation practices), and also copyrights to published materials.
• Raising the edition rating and increasing its representation on the national and international library-abstracting and scientometric platforms.

In our work, we strive to follow of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) recommendations - The European Association of Science Editors (EASE)

The modern online toolkit of Open Journal System international editorial and publishing platform (on the “Scientific Periodicals of Ukraine” platform) and international digital identification of scientific publications – DOI from Crossref registration agency, allow us to join and support an international Initiative for Open Citations, using the advantages of Crossref’s Cited-by service, to be presented on an Open Ukrainian Citation Index (OUCI) national platform – a database of scientific literature and tool for citations tracking, and also such modern international digital scientific platforms as Dimensions (USA, UK), WorldCat (USA), OpenAIRE (Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe (EU), BASE (Germany), Scilit (Basel, Switzerland), etc.

 

Open Access Policy

(approved at the meeting of the Academic Council ONEU, prot. № 6 from 25.02.2014)

Collection of scientific works «Socio-Economic Research Bulletin» of Odessa National Economic University is an open access edition, which supports the principles of free flow of scientific information and global knowledge sharing for general social progress. Open access policy provides:

• free access to electronic versions issues and its viewing and downloading;
• placing a full-text issues on the edition website;
• placing edition on official website of the Vernadskiy National Library of Ukraine;
• placing edition in the national and international scientific portals (international portal Open Journal System, which supported by the «Scientific Periodicals of Ukraine» project);
• placing edition in the national and international open access electronic repositories, libraries and directories;
• placing edition in the national and international scientometric, refereed and other databases for indexing, ranking and improving impact-factor.

Open Access Policy is extends for all issues of «Socio-Economic Research Bulletin» since its creating.

 

Subject areas

• Economic theory and history of economic thought (051 Economics);
• Economics and national economy management (051 Economics, 073 Management);
• Productive forces development and regional economy (051 Economics);
• Economics of nature management and environmental protection (051 Economics);
• Demography, labor economics, social economy and politics (051 Economics);
• State and business entities economic security (051 Economics, 073 Management);
• Mathematical methods, models and information technologies in economics (051 Economics);
• Analysis, audit, accounting and taxation (051 Economics, 071 Accounting and taxation);
• Finance, banking and insurance (072 Finance, banking and insurance);
• Management and administration (073 Management, 281 Public management and administration);
• Marketing, entrepreneurship, trade and stock exchange activity (075 Marketing, 076 Entrepreneurship, trade and stock exchange activity);
• Tourism economics and hotel and restaurant business (241 Hotel and restaurant business, 242 Tourism);
• International economic relations (292 International economic relations).

Ethical Conduct Policy for Editors, Editorial Boards, Reviewers and Authors

The scientific publications ethics is a system of professional behavior norms in relations between authors, reviewers, editors, publishers in creating, disseminating and using process of scientific research and publications.

Editorial board of «Socio-Economic Research Bulletin» was guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics – Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), recommendations for publishing policy developing, , and also the best international practices and publication standards.

We strive to follow Сore Practice COPE for journal and publishers in our work (Сore Practice COPE).

 

Ethical standards for editors

1. General obligations and responsibilities for editors:

• 1.1. Editors should be responsible for everything published in journal.
• This means that editors should:
• 1.2. Strive to meet the needs of readers and authors.
• 1.3. Strive to constantly improve your journal.
• 1.4. In the work process have procedures which ensure of the published materials quality.
• 1.5. To protect freedom and opinion diversity.
• 1.6. To keep faithful to the principles of scientific integrity.
• 1.7. Do not allow that commercial interests compromised intellectual and ethical standards.
• 1.8. Always be prepared to publish corrections, explanations, rebuttals (recall articles) and apologies, when it is necessary.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• actively seek advice from readers, reviewers and members of editorial board about ways to improve the work of their journal;
• encourage research of peer review processes effectiveness, and also publish work procedures adopted in the journal and re-evaluate them, when there are new discoveries;
• try to convince the publisher to provide the necessary resources and assistance from experts (for example, designers, and lawyers);
• to support initiatives, which aimed at preventing dishonest behavior in research conducting and publications preparing;
• to support initiatives for researchers training on publication ethics;
• to evaluate influence that is caused by the policy of their journal on the authors and reviewers behavior, and if necessary, to revise this policy in such a way as to encourage them to responsible behavior.

2. Relationship with readers

Readers should be informed about who sponsored the research or any other scientific work, and also what role those or other sponsors played in the research and publication of its results.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to ensure that all published articles and reviews are reviewed by specialists with a necessary qualifications (including statistical analysis, where is it necessary);
• to use procedures that encourage the accuracy, completeness and clarity of research;
• to use an authorship identification system that encourages the use of best practices (such that lists of authors accurately identify who performed the work and discouraged unfair practices (for example, anonymous or gift authorship);
• to inform readers about steps, which designed to ensure that articles by journal staff or members of editorial board receive an objective and impartial evaluation.

3. Relationship with authors

• 3.1. Editors’ decisions about the manuscript accepting or rejecting should be based on the article’s significance, its originality, the sequence of presentation, an information reliability, which contained in it and the relevance of journal’s subject areas.
• 3.2. Editors should not reverse the decision about article publication, unless serious problems are discovered with it.
• 3.3. New editors should not reverse the decision about article publication, which adopted by former editors, unless serious problems are discovered with them.
• 3.4. The procedure for articles reviewing by other researchers and/or experts should be clearly formulated and editors should be prepared to justify any significant deviation from the described procedure.
• 3.5. Journals should have a clearly defined mechanism for authors’ appeal against of editors’ decision.
• 3.6. Editors should publish full requirements for article authors and regularly review them when significant circumstances arise for changes.
• 3.7. Editors should declare the criteria, which used to determine who can be considered the author of article and the person who has made a contribution to it, according to standards adopted in the relevant field.
• 3.8. Editors should publish a description of competing interests of all persons who contributed to the article that could affect it, or publish corrections if such competing interests appeared after publication.
• 3.9. The editor-in-chief must ensure an effective selection of reviewers for articles (i.e., persons who can make a competent opinion about the work and who have no conflict of interest for this work).
• 3.10. Editors should respect the authors’ wishes about that any person should not review their work if such a request is reasonable and feasible.
• 3.11. Editors should use appropriate COPE procedures in case of suspicion of unfair behavior and disputes about authorship.
• 3.12. Editors should announce the dates for articles submission to the editorial office and their accepting to publication.

4. Relationship with reviewers

• 4.1. Editors should publish full requirements for reviewers, including the requirement to keep peer-reviewed material confidential. These rules should be regularly updated and have links or hyperlinks to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
• 4.2. Editors should require from reviewer to disclose any information about a possible conflict of interest before he gives his consent to the review.
• 4.3. Editors should have the protection procedures of reviewers anonymity, unless they don’t use an open peer review system, and both authors and reviewers should be informed about it.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to encourage reviewers to write comments on ethical questions and about the possibility of unfair behavior in connection with the reviewed article (for example, an unethical research program, unacceptable methods of processing or presenting data);
• to encourage reviewers to comment of the article originality degree and to pay attention to the possibility of duplicate publications and plagiarism;
• if possible, to provide reviewers with tools for publications accessing, relating to the peer-reviewed article (for example, a link to cited articles and bibliographic search);
• to inform the authors of all comments about their work made by reviewers, unless they don’t contain offensive or libelous comments;
• to celebrate the contribution of reviewers in journal activity;
• to encourage academic institutions to consider peer review work as part of their academic process;
• to analyze the reviewers work quality and to take steps for ensure that it is at a high level;
• to develop and maintain a database of relevant reviewers and update it based on an analysis of the reviewers work results;
• to refuse to cooperate with reviewers who constantly write impolite, belated and insignificant reviews;
• to ensure that the reviewers database reflects the community of their journal, and add new reviewers to it if necessary;
• to use a wide range of sources for new reviewers search (not only personal contacts, but also, for example, authors’ proposals, bibliographic and scientometric databases);
• to follow international COPE procedures in case of probability of reviewers unfair behavior.

5. Relationship with editorial board

Editors should inform the new members of editorial board everything that is expected of their activity and notify existing members about any changes in used approaches and procedures.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to form procedures, which ensuring that articles by editorial board members also impartial considered as articles by outside authors;
• to determine, who of editorial board members is able to actively contribute to journal management improving;
• on a regular basis to review of editorial board composition;
• accurately explain to editorial board members their functions and responsibilities, which may include:
  • 1) journal representatives functions performing;
  • 2) journal maintaining and promoting;
  • 3) the best authors and works search (for example, looking the protocols of editorial board meetings) and active actions for these authors inviting to submit their articles to the journal again;
  • 4) analysis of articles, submitted to the journal;
  • 5) accepting assignments for writing editorials articles, reviews and comments on work in the field of their specialization;
• actively participate in editorial board meetings, periodically hold consultations with editorial board members (for example, once a year), that to find their opinion about the journal work, to inform them about changes in the journal policy and to determine the future goals.

6. Relationships with a journal owners and publishers

• 6.1. The relationship of editors with publishers and journal owners should be firmly based on the editorial independence principle.
• 6.2. Editors must decide decision about which articles to publish solely on the basis of their quality and relevance to the journal subject area, without interference from the journal owner/publisher.
• 6.3. The relationship between the journal owner/publisher and editor should be clearly formulated in the signed contract.
• 6.4. The terms of this contract must comply with COPE Code of Conduct for journal editors.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to form a mechanism for resolving disputes between them and journal owner/publisher with a description of the necessary procedures;
• regularly exchange information with the journal owner and publisher.

7. Editing and peer review processes

• 7.1. Editors should ensure honest, impartial and timely peer review process for articles, which submitted for publication.
• 7.2. Editors should use procedures, which ensure maintaining confidentiality of materials submitted to the journal during peer review.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to ensure that the specialists involved in the editing process (including themselves) have sufficient qualifications and they are aware about current rules, recommendations and facts regarding the peer review process and journal management;
• keep abreast of the latest research on the reviewing topic and new tools that can be used in the review writing process;
• to adopt peer review methods that are most appropriate for their journal and researchers community, which is served by the journal;
• periodically analyze peer review approaches for possible improvements;
• to inform COPE about problems that arise, especially if problematic questions are not resolved with using COPE procedures or new types of fraudulent behavior are identified during publication.

8. Quality assurance

Editors should make all reasonable effort that ensure the quality of their published material, given that journals and sections in journals may have different goals and standards.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to apply procedures for falsified data identifying (for example, photographs that were improperly processed, or plagiarism) or to all submitted articles, or in case of suspected violations;
• to form the journals’ style on the basis of objective methods, and not on a purely aesthetic basis or personal preferences.

9. Protection of personal data

Editors must comply a privacy laws in the jurisdiction to which they belong. In addition, in any case, they must always protect the confidentiality of individual information, which obtained in the research process and other professional activity. It is possible to publish personal information without express consent, if the public interest outweighs the possible damage and it is impossible to obtain consent, or if the person would most likely not object to the publication.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to formulate its policy regarding the publication of personal data (for example, data allowing identification of an individual or photographs) and a clear explanation of such policy to the authors.

10. Promoting of ethical research

• 10.1. Editors should make an effort to ensure that the research they publish is conducted in accordance with internationally recognized ethical standards.
• 10.2. Editors should seek to get a confirmation that published studies have been approved by the appropriate authority (for example, ethics research committee or institution supervisory board), if one exists. However, editors should be aware that such approval does not guarantee that the study is ethical.

11. Actions in case of suspicion of unfair behavior

• 11.1. Editors must take certain steps if they suspect the presence of unscrupulous behavior or they will learn about an indict accusation in unscrupulous behavior. This obligation applies to both published and unpublished materials.
• 11.2. Editors should not simply refuse in articles publish if there is a suspicion in the possibility of unscrupulous behavior, but they must respond to such situations.
• 11.3. If this possible, editors should follow the COPE procedures. Primarily, editors should seek clarification from the authors of such articles. Upon receipt of an unsatisfactory response, editors should contact with their employer or appropriate organization (possibly the regulatory authority) with a request to conduct an investigation.
• 11.4. Editors should take all necessary measures for ensuring the proper conduct of investigation and if this cannot be done, the editors should do everything possible for solving the problem.

12. The scientific credibility ensuring in publications

• 12.1. Errors or allegations that are misleading should be removed from the texts as soon as possible before the wide audience is informed.
• 12.2. Editors should follow COPE procedures when recalling articles.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to take measures for reduce the veiled duplication of publications;
• to check whether the material that is published is securely archived (for example, in permanent online repositories);
• to use systems that allow authors to quickly and freely access to original research articles.

13. Intellectual property

Editors should be attentive to the related of intellectual property questions, and to cooperate with a publisher in the resolution of cases of possible violations of intellectual property protection law and agreements.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to apply plagiarism detection tools (for example, special programs, search for similar names) in articles which proposed for publication (or in all articles, or in case of suspicion in plagiarism);
• to support authors whose copyright has been violated, or those who have been the victim of plagiarism;
• to be prepared to work together with the publisher to protect copyright and to prosecute violators (for example, by submitting requests to recall articles or removing materials from websites), regardless of whether this case is associated with a journal copyright infringement.

14. Encouraging of discussions

• 14.1. Editors should encourage and readily consider a reasonable criticism of the works, which published in their journal.
• 14.2. Authors of criticized material should be able to respond to criticism.
• 14.3. Manuscripts that report only negative results may also be published.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to be open for researches that challenge previous works, which published in journal.

15. Complaints

• 15.1. Editors should quickly respond to complaints that are received and do everything possible so that there is a solution method for persons dissatisfied with the consideration of their complaints, to further advance their complaints. This mechanism should be clearly described in the journal and should include information about how to submit outstanding questions to COPE.
• 15.2. Editors should follow the procedures described by COPE.

16. Commercial considerations

• 16.1. Journals should apply policy, which ensure that commercial considerations do not affect on editorial decisions.
• 16.2. Journals policy on the advertising interaction with a journal content and sponsored articles publication should be clearly formulated.
• 16.3. Repeated printings are publishing exactly in their original form, except when it is necessary to amend the text. In this case, it should be possible to identify the corrected places.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to publish a general description of journal’s revenue sources (for example, the share of revenue obtained from printed advertising, the sale of print runs, the sponsored articles publication, page rates, etc.);
• to ensure that the review of paid articles in the journal occurs as well as regular articles;
• to ensure that sponsored articles are only accepted on the basis of their quality and interest fof readers, and not for commercial reasons.

17. Conflicts of interests

• 17.1. Editors should have procedures for resolving their own conflicts of interest, as well as for conflicts of interest for their employees, authors, reviewers, and editorial board members.
• 17.2. Journals should have a clearly declared mechanism for articles submitting from their editors, staff and editorial board members that ensure their impartial review.

Editors, who are committed to implementing the principles of Сore Practices (COPE), endorsed by the international scientific community, can also do the following:

• to publish lists of significant interests (financial, academic or otherwise) that may affect on their decision, all editorial staff and editorial board members, and update them at least once a year.

Ethical standards for editorial board

1. The main motivation for scientific edition editorial board activity is the desire to enrich a science and society with new knowledge, the scientific community recognition, and responsibility in front of society.
2. The editorial board adheres to the rule in its work, that original articles are accepted for publication of scientific results, the authors of which found acceptable solutions to the problem under study and objectively presented them.
3. The editorial board adheres to the principles of integrity and transparency at all stages of the editorial and publishing process and considers unacceptable manifestations of fraud, in particular, the data fabrication and falsification, piracy and plagiarism, interference in the scientific process of public authorities and their leaders, as well as biased influence on the nature of the data and conclusions obtained in the research.
4. The editorial of journal do not bear any responsibility to the authors and/or third persons and organizations for possible damage, which caused by the article publication. The editorial board is entitled to withdraw the published article if it turns out that in the process of writing someone’s rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics were violated. The editorial board informs about the fact of article seizure by the author, who her submitted, and organization where this work was carried out.
5. The editorial board has a right and duty to defend edition scientific priorities and to refuse in scientific article publication that contains obviously inaccurate and inconclusive scientific results.
6. The editorial board recognizes international and national copyright laws and draws attention to the fact that a scientist can use information from any publication, provided that he indicates the source and draws a clear line between his data and another’s achievements.
7. The editorial board in its activity adheres to the rule that the borrowing of any texts, photographs, figures, tables, diagrams, formulas for own publications requires of authors’ and/or publishers’ permission.

Ethical standards for reviewers

1. A scientist should be a reviewer only in the field of his competence in accordance with his knowledge and experience.
2. A scientist should adhere to the equality principle when conducting peer review. Any discrimination based on gender, race, political opinion or cultural and social affiliation is incompatible with this principle.
3. The reviewer is obliged to give an objective and reasoned evaluation of submitted scientific article and should be impartial. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable.
4. During the reviewing and critical comments, the scientist should adhere to the equality principles, factual validity and reliability. An equality principle guarantees equal rights to all participants in a scientific discussion or polemic, regardless of academic degrees and ranks. The principle of factual validity excludes biased criticism. The principle of certainty prohibits any misrepresentation for purpose of humiliation or discredited.
5. When conducting an expert review, the scientist should adhere to the confidentiality principle, maintain independence and not succumb to pressure during the conclusions preparation and announcement.
6. Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes.
7. If authors demonstrate dishonest practices and violate ethical principles, the reviewer should inform the editor-in-chief about this. The editor-in-chief should consider this question at the editorial board meeting and propose a collegial decision about refuse to publish such an article.

Ethical standards for authors

1. The author should adhere to highest professional standards in the planning and conduct of research based on in-depth knowledge about the world science achievements in a particular field.
2. The main of author responsibility is to provide an accurate report about the conducted research, as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
3. The authors of articles bear all responsibility for their content and directly for the fact of their publication.
4. The initial report about the research results should be sufficiently complete and contain the necessary links to available information sources.
5. The author should cite those publications that have had a decisive influence on the work content that is presented, as well as those that can quickly acquaint the reader with earlier works that are essential for understanding this research. The author must conduct a literary search that find and cite original publications, in which describe research that are closely related to this message. It is also necessary to properly indicate the sources of fundamentally important materials used in the work, if these materials were not received by the author himself.
6. Authors should not submit a manuscript to the journal, she has been sent to another journal and it is under consideration, as well as an article already published in another journal.
7. If the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its consideration or after its publication, he should inform the editorial office of this journal as soon as possible.
8. The author should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same results to more than one journal in the form of an initial publication, supposed to submit a manuscript of a full article that extends a previously published short preliminary report (message) about the same work. However, when submitting such a manuscript, the editor should be notified of an earlier message, and the preliminary message itself should be cited in this manuscript.
9. The author must necessarily indicate the sources of all cited or presented information, with the exception of well-known data. Information, which obtained privately, during a conversation, during correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or communicated in the author’s work without the explicit permission of the researcher from whom this information was obtained.
10. Experimental or theoretical research can sometimes serve as the basis for criticizing the work of another researcher. Published articles, as appropriate, may contain similar criticism. Personal criticism, however, cannot be considered appropriate in any circumstances.
11. The co-authors of article should be all persons who have made significant scientific contributions to the presented work and who share responsibility for obtained results. The administrative relationship with this research alone is not a basis for qualifying the concerned person as a co-author (but in some cases it may be appropriate to note significant administrative assistance in the work). The author, who submits the manuscript for publication is responsible for ensuring that only those who meet the criterion of authorship are included in the list of co-authors. In an article written by several authors, the author who submits contact information, documents to the editorial office and carries on correspondence with editors takes responsibility for the consent of other authors to publish it in the journal.
12. Authors should be necessarily inform the editorial board of any potential conflict of interest, for example, the consulting or financial interests of any company, which could be affected by the publication of the results contained in this manuscript. Authors should ensure that there are no contractual relationships or ownership considerations that could affect the publication of information contained in the submitted manuscript.
13. During the research results publishing, which conducted by a group of scientists, all who took a creative part in the work should be indicated as authors and, if necessary, their personal contribution can be indicated.
14. The scientist must provide the necessary protection of intellectual property and comply with copyright laws.

Antiplagiarism policy

All articles submitted to the editorial board, necessarily pass the plagiarism check.

Plagiarism involves the deliberate copying of unfamiliar works without proper indication authorship or content copying without providing for appropriate references. Plagiarism may be a violation of copyright law, as well as patent law, and as such may cause to legal responsibility.

The editorial board, reviewers adhere to a strict policy in case of plagiarism within their competence, which provides for the following:

• Before, during or after the publication process, if an editorial board member, reviewer or author discovers any element of plagiarism, authors are advised to indicate appropriate citations.
• The submitted manuscript is checked for the plagiarism before starting the review process.
• If between 5% up to 20% plagiarism is detected, the manuscript is sent for revision in order to confirm an authorship identification. If more than 20% of plagiarism is detected, the manuscript is rejected and authors are encouraged to review and resubmit the manuscript.
• If an edition readers find any case of plagiarism, the editorial board should send them a request for receiving an obtain information from the editorial office with the following details, such as: journal name, manuscript title, volume number, issue number, publication year or any other information that may be of interest to the journal. In this case, the editorial board follows the appropriate procedure for information checking provided and makes a decision about on compliance of published material with established criteria.
• The editor should not leave unanswered claims regarding the reviewed manuscripts or published materials, as well as in case upon detection of a conflict situation, to take all necessary measures for restoring the violated rights.
• The manuscript, which went through a peer review process and was published in the journal, but later it was discovered that it contains plagiarism, is sent to the address where the author works and to a financial agency. Each page of the PDF is marked and based on the extent of plagiarism and the article may be formally retracted.
• Unicheck anti-plagiarism software is used to verify of the article originality. The submitted manuscript is considered an unpublished work and it is not considered for publication in other editions. Reprinting the submitted manuscript in whole or in part will be considered a violation of plagiarism policy and will not be approved by the journal. Plagiarism also applies to drawings, tables, equations or illustrations, direct downloads from Internet without proper confirmation of the sources from which they are taken.
• Sometimes, the authors are in danger of committing self-plagiarism. It refers to reuse of one’s own copyrighted material without proper attribution to the original source. If a categorical reference is made to previously published work or the exact sentences are cited in quotation marks, it clearly separates it from the rest of the content and doesn’t create any ambiguity. At times, the authors may not aware that they are plagiarizing the content; nevertheless it is one’s own responsibility to clearly demarcate the differences between paraphrasing and quoting exact words and citing with proper references. At times, the authors knowingly borrow the ideas, contents from the other authors which constitutes blatant plagiarism. Sometimes, the authors resort to much more devious means such as salami-slicing where the authors extract small amounts of data in increments from the previously published articles.
• If the authors knowingly borrow ideas, the scientific works content of other authors, this is unambiguously assessed by the editorial board and scientific community as plagiarism with the corresponding legal consequences for such an author.

If the suspected plagiarism is detected in a published article

• The person whoever has disclosed this information is advised to follow the process to effectively address the problem.
• The extent of copying in the published article suspected of plagiarism is evaluated.
• The editorial board members are intimated and asked for their valuable feedback.
• The author for the article in question is contacted with supporting evidence and asked for a response.
• If the authors are found guilty of plagiarism, editorial board publishes an official disclaimer of publication.
• The edition will not consider the author’s any publications in the future for a period of 3 years.
• Different types of plagiarism are explained based on extent, originality of the copied material, context, referencing, intention, author seniority and language. The journal responses to plagiarism include educating authors, contacting authors’ institutions, issuing corrections and issuing retractions.
• The editor provides the following documentation in response to the plagiarized work: the description of the alleged misconduct; manuscript title; the list of the authors; title of ideas; list of creators and date of creation; copies of both the manuscripts; full name and address of the complainant.
• The charge of the plagiarism, the supporting materials and the outcomes remain confidential and are known to only those who are involved in the review process.