Editorial Policies

Below policies describe the guidelines in the publication process of ICAPSR’s journal’s. The Journal accept & support to adhere to the following standards and requirements given by:

 

COPE – Committee on Publication Ethics
ICMJE – International Committee of Medical Journal Editors
OASPA- Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association

  1. Ethical Publishing Practice
  2. Redundant/Duplicate publication
  3. Consent for publication
  4. Authorship
  5. Conflict of interest
  6. Citation Manipulation
  7. Funding Disclosure
  8. Confidentiality
  9. Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct
  10. Ethical Approval of Studies and Informed Consent
  11. Article Correction and Retraction 

Ethical Publishing Practices

All the Authors in Engineering and Computational Intelligence Journal (ECIJ) journal must comply with best practices in publication ethics. Engineering and Computational Intelligence Journal (ECIJ) Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Redundant Publication

Authors need to take necessary permissions, who wish to publish translations of the articles that have been published elsewhere, permission clearly stated that the material has been translated and re-published and indicate clearly the original source of the material. The Editor-in-Chief may request copies of related publications if he/she is concerned about overlap and possible redundancy.

Consent for Publication

All authors must offer written, informed consent for any papers, indicating that the results and any associated photos can be published. They must include a statement stating that they have permission to publish any identifiable photos of individuals in the piece. If the article contains any clinical images or personally identifiable data, you must include an explicit consent statement under a separate heading in the 'Consent' section (for example, "We confirm that we have obtained permission to use [images/data] from the participants/patients/individuals included in this presentation"). Please also include the terms on which the authorization was granted.

Authorship

All those who have made a major contribution should be given the opportunity to be credited as authors, according to the writers. Other people who helped with the research should be acknowledged, but not credited as authors.

The final version of the submitted paper should be received by all authors, who should consent to its submission and take appropriate responsibility for it. A co-author should not be someone who is reluctant or unable to bear appropriate responsibility for a manuscript.

During the publication process, all authors should be consulted regarding changes to authorship (e.g., the list of authors), and it should be obvious to the journal that they have provided their approval.

To remove an author from a paper after it has been submitted, all of the authors must agree in writing.

Requests should be forwarded to icapsra@gmail.com

For more information, please read COPE Flowcharts on Changes in Authorship

Conflict of Interest

This clause requires the declaration of all financial and non-financial competing interests. "The author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper," they should write if there are no conflicts of interest. Otherwise, any potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed in this section of the article.

Funding Disclosure

Separately from declaring Competing Interests, authors must disclose the financing which made their work possible. The Funding statement is published in the final article. This disclosure provides added transparency.

Confidentiality

All information regarding a submitted manuscript should be kept confidential by editors and publication staff, who should only share it with those involved in the evaluation, review, and publication processes. Editors should not utilize confidential information for personal gain, and they should take reasonable precautions to ensure that such information is not misused for the benefit of others.

Editors should contact the affected parties and follow up on such issues until they are satisfactorily resolved in cases of breach of confidence by individuals involved in the peer-review process.

Citation Manipulation

As most metrics of the scholarly performance of journal are based on citations from published articles. Citation manipulation refers to any systematic practice that inappropriately pressures authors to cite material with the primary goal of boosting citation rates all such practices are unacceptable.

The following forms of citation manipulation (for the purpose of increasing citation rates) will be reported:

  1. Coercion: At some point during the peer-review process, editors (or anyone else involved in the process) request that authors add citations from their own journal (or a journal from the same publisher).
  2. Editorials: Editors write editorials in which a disproportionate number of articles from their own journal are cited.
  3. Reviewers suggesting citations of their own work. Reviewers may suggest that authors cite their articles.
  4. Self-citation: Authors cite large numbers of their own articles in all or most of their publications.
  5. Citation swapping: A group of colleagues (perhaps students or research associates of a particular researcher) agrees to preferentially and regularly cite each other’s articles in all or most of their publications.

Addressing Allegations or Findings of Misconduct

Concerns about probable scientific misconduct are typically raised with the editors of a journal

concerning a manuscript that is being considered for publication or has already been published. The editor is not solely responsible for monitoring possible failure to fulfil legal or ethical research and publication standards, but it is within his or her obligations to develop and implement policies that

encourage good publishing practices.

When claims and/or findings of misconduct are submitted, the editor will be held responsible for investigating, assessing, and/or punishing the author for these transgressions.

Furthermore, the editor and publisher have a duty to notify readers and secondary services of content that has been formally confirmed to be plagiarized, created, or falsified

Ethical Approval of Studies and Informed Consent

For human or animal experimental investigations, it is a prerequisite to provide a formal review and approval, or review and waiver, by an appropriate institutional review board or ethics committee, which should be documented in the paper. For investigations undertaken on human subjects, the manner in which the informed consent was obtained from the study participants (i.e., oral or written) should be stated in the Methods section. Authors are encouraged to obtain patient consent when they use confidential case material. Consent is not necessary in the case of very brief case vignettes which do not contain identifying information or if the case material is disguised sufficiently to prevent identification of the patient.

In obtaining consent, the author(s) should discuss the purpose(s) of publication, the possible risks and benefits to the patient and the patient’s right to withhold or withdraw consent. In the case of a minor patient, consent should be obtained from the parent(s) or guardian(s).