JMEIT

Journal of Management Engineering and Information Technology

Get Adobe Flash player

 Publication Ethics and Malpractice - JMEIT

The participants involved in the act of publishing (research article) like the author(s), the journal editor(s), the peer reviewers and the publisher, it is necessary to agree upon certain standards of expected ethical behavior to maintain the publishing standards in the research world. We expect and encourage all the concerned participants associated with the journal to follow the norms as mentioned in our website’s [Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement- JMEIT]. Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, available at www.publicationethics.org).

 


Chief - Editor Responsibilities

Publication Decisions & Accountability


The chief- editor of a journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published, and, moreover, is accountable for everything published in the journal. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and/or the policies of the publisher, as well as, by the legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The chief-editor may discuss with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The chief-editor should maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, denials, and apologies when needed.

Gender, Racial and Language Bias

The chief-editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s).


Confidentiality
The chief-editor 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, to maintain confidentiality of the publication process.


Disclosure, conflicts and other issues
The chief-editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Pull back/ withdrawal of Articles when considering pull back, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections relating to articles that have been published in JMEIT journal.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in chief-editor’s/ editors own research without the explicit written consent of the author(s). Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.


The chief-editor is dedicated to ensuring that advertising, reprint or any other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The publishing decisions should be based on the content and suggestions/ recommendation made by of editor/ reviewers.
The chief-editor should seek so ensure a fair and appropriate peer-review process. The chief-editor should refuse himself/herself from handling manuscripts (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

The chief-editor should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Reviewer Responsibilities


Contribution to editorial decisions
Peer review supports the chief-editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript by suggesting some points to strengthen the quality of manuscript.


Promptness
Any invited reviewer(s) who feels he/ she could not do the justice to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible due to any personal or professional reasons should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be communicated to review the manuscript to avoid any delay in the process.


Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review by reviewers must be treat as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the chief-editor.


Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal support/criticism of the author(s) is inacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments to give strength to the manuscript.


Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s). Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers should also call to the chief-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.





Author Responsibilities

 
Reporting standards
Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are intolerable.


Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.


Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. The author should wait for the decision made by chief- editor on the suggestions and recommendation given by reviewers and take action accordingly.


Acknowledgement of sources

As other researchers had contributed their time and efforts in making a platform to continue further research in a particular area the author should give proper acknowledgment of the work of others. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship (Author, Co-author, ‘Ghost,’ ‘guest’)
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The names of the authors should be decided before submitting the manuscript according a mutual decision if there are more than one author. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section. We disapprove the unethical practice of ‘Ghost,’ ‘guest’ or ‘gift’ authorship (or anything that does not have any proper contribution to an article) and take appropriate steps against such practices. Request to add co-authors, after a manuscript has been accepted will require approval of the Chief Editor, a proper reason has to be there to accept the request.


Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Many research papers/ projects are funded by Institution/ Govt. departments/ Firms, all authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.


Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s chief-editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate correction statement or erratum.


Publisher Responsibilities


Editorial autonomy
JMEIT is committed to working with chief-editor, editors to define clearly the respective roles of publisher and of editors in order to ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions, without any outside influence.


Intellectual property and copyright
We protect the intellectual property and copyright of its imprints, authors and publishing partners as per the guidelines.

 
Scientific Misbehavior

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misbehavior, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the chief-editor/ editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of a correction statement or erratum or, in the most severe cases, the withdrawal of the affected work.


Important Links 

Downloads               |        Guidelines to Authors                          |     Bank Details 


Ad. size 430 x 100 px with link to the parent website


Ad. size 430 x 100 px with link to the parent website