Publication Ethics

Publication ethics in Journal of Stress Analysis (Abbreviation: J. Stress Anal.) are based on the suggested best practice guidelines by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).  Each individual involved in the process of publishing a paper in Journal of Stress Analysis must adhere to the policies of the journal based on their role as Author, Editor or Reviewer.

 

A) As an author publishing in Journal of Stress Analysis

Authors should also read the Guide for Authors section of the website before submitting a manuscript. Authors are strongly advised to also read the international standards for authors on COPE’s website.

1.  Authorship should be granted only based on the following four criteria:

•  Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
• Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
• Final approval of the version to be published
• Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved

All those designated as authors should meet all the criteria for authorship, and all who meet the four criteria stated above should be identified as authors.

2. Authors should refrain from submitting a manuscript that has been previously published in part or in whole in other journals or any other medium that may result in conflicting copyright ownership claims or plagiarism. Manuscripts previously published in part in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis are an exception to this rule and can be submitted for peer-review.

3. Authors should ensure that they have properly cited all the relevant works they have quoted or used for the creation of the submitted work. Authors should not cite any work that has not contributed to the submitted manuscript or if they have not read the cited work. Citations in the References section of the manuscript must also appear within the body of the submitted manuscript.

4. If an author discovers an error or an inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author’s obligation and duty to promptly report it to the editorial office of the journal.

5. Authors should sign and fill the conflicts of interest disclosure form and declare all possible sources of conflicting interests regarding their research.

6. Authors retain the rights to share their article for personal use, institutional use, presentation of their research in academic conferences or self-archiving a copy of the original article for non-commercial scholarly purposes on their personal websites or other distribution venues such as ResearchGate or similar media provided that the article is archived or released as published by Journal of Stress Analysis and appropriate credit is given to the original article on our website. Authors are required to sign and fill the Author-Publisher Agreement form and submit it to the journal once their manuscript has been accepted to be published in a future issue.

7. Authors should present their results honestly and clearly without fabrication, falsification or dishonest manipulation of data or findings of their research. Laboratory images should not be modified in a misleading manner.

8. Authors should include sufficient detail about their methods to enable other researchers to repeat their experiments and verify their results independently.

9. Authors should report their research completely. Inconvenient, inconsistent or inexplicable findings which do not support the authors’ or sponsors’ hypothesis must not be omitted.

 

B) As an editor in Journal of Stress Analysis

Editors are strongly advised to also read COPE’s Code of Conduct for Journal Editors.

1. Editors are responsible for everything published in Journal of Stress Analysis. Editors are committed to assure the quality of the material published in Journal of Stress Analysis.
2. Editors must ensure that qualified reviewers without competing interests are selected for reviewing submissions.
3. Editors must spare no effort to ensure that the peer-review process is done fairly and objectively, solely based on scientific merits and in a timely manner.
4. Editors are committed to guide reviewers on everything that is expected of them and answer all questions pertaining to the peer-review process of submissions. Reviewers can learn more information about the peer-review process and reviewing policies of the journal in the dedicated sections on the website.
5. Editors are committed to keep the information obtained from submitted manuscripts confidential.
6. Editors must accept responsibility for the decisions they make.
7. Editors must release errata, corrigenda or clarifications and should not refrain from retracting a publication if they have clear evidence of scientific misconduct, unethical research, plagiarism or other violations of ethical academic publishing.
8. Editors should maintain the scientific integrity of submitted manuscripts.
9. Editorial evaluation of a submitted manuscript will be based on originality of content, clarity of presentation, English fluency, soundness of methodology, rigorous analysis and interpretation of data and contribution to the scientific interests of the journal’s audience, as defined in the journal’s scope.
10. Editors in Journal of Stress Analysis should request authors to provide sufficient information for readers to be informed about the funders and their roles in the research and publication of published articles.

 

C) As a peer reviewer in Journal of Stress Analysis

Reviewers should also visit the peer-review section of the website and other instructions for reviewers on the website. Reviewers are also encouraged to visit COPE’s Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.

1. Journal of Stress Analysis follows a double-blind peer-review policy to ensure the objectivity of the review process. Reviewers are selected based on expertise and subject knowledge to give a fair assessment of the scientific merits of the manuscript under consideration.
2. Reviewers should keep the information obtained during the review process confidential and they should not use it for any person’s or organization’s advantage, or to disadvantage of others. Reviewers should continue to keep the content of the manuscript or the details of the review process confidential even when the peer-review process has ended.
3. Reviewers should not have access to any information that may reveal the identity of the manuscript’s author(s) during the refereeing process. If a reviewer suspects the identity of the author(s), they are expected to notify the journal immediately.
4. Reviewers should refrain from writing inflammatory or inappropriate comments that might be deemed offensive by the authors. Comments should be written in an objective and fair manner to improve the quality of the manuscript under consideration; preferably using verbs in the passive voice.
5. Reviewers should accept to participate in the review process only if they have enough expertise in the subject of the manuscript to carry out a proper assessment in a timely manner. If a reviewer, after initially accepting to review a manuscript, finds out that they do not have the required expertise to assess some aspects of the manuscript, they should immediately inform the journal as this will delay the review process.
6. Reviewers are encouraged to point out relevant published works which have been used in the manuscript but not properly cited. Reviewers are requested to check if all cited works in the References section of the manuscript under consideration have also been mentioned in the body of the manuscript.
7. Reviewers should submit their review in a timely manner and refrain from requesting unnecessary additional information that will prolong the review process.
8. Reviewers should notify the journal as soon as possible if circumstances arise that can prevent them from submitting their review before the deadline.
9. Reviewers should not involve other individuals in the review process without notifying the journal first. For instance, reviewers should not entrust their students or junior researchers under their supervision with the task of refereeing the manuscript assigned to them without discussing it with the journal.

 

Defining the Cases of Misconduct

Plagiarism: Unacknowledged appropriation of someone else’s work or presenting it as one’s own is called plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts must be original. Manuscripts under consideration for publication or already published by other journals cannot be submitted.

Conflict of interest: Objectivity and impartiality of the individuals involved in scholarly publication should not be harmed by professional, financial, commercial or personal rivalries or interests; otherwise, a potential conflict of interest may arise. In scholarly publishing, a conflict of interest usually arises when a person’s financial interests might affect their objectivity in reporting or interpreting their research. Authors intending to publish in Journal of Stress Analysis are required to fill and submit the Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest form before their manuscript can be accepted for publication.

Data fabrication and falsification: Data fabrication refers to a situation where the authors fabricate inauthentic data without performing any experiments or research. If a researcher carries out an experiment, butintentionally misrepresents the data or findings of the experiment by inappropriately manipulating or omitting data or findings from the research, then a case of data falsification has occurred.

Duplicate or Multiple Publication: Publishing two or more papers with essentially the same material, including but not restricted to hypotheses, data and conclusions, whether by the same author or publisher, is called duplicate or multiple publication.

Citation manipulation: Citations are the main quantitative means of assessing the scientific output of an author, an institution or a journal by other members of the scientific community. Citation manipulation refers to any systematic practice of increasing the citations given to a specific author’s works or articles associated with or published by a specific entity like an academic institution or a journal. Citation manipulation deceives the scientific community about the attractiveness of a published work and therefore, it is a serious form of scientific misconduct and unethical behavior.