Publication Ethics

1.  Introduction

Authors, reviewers, editorial board, editor-in-chief and publishers should to be aware of their responsibilities, and commit research ethics. Article submission, review of reviewers and editor-in-chief's acceptance or rejection, are considered as journals law admission otherwise the journals have all the rights.

This journal is committed to upholding the integrity of the scientific record. JMM will follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines on how to deal with potential acts of misconduct.

 

2.   Authors responsibilities

Author(s) must be honest in presenting the results of their research. Research misconduct is harmful for knowledge, which may mislead other researchers. When submitting a manuscript, an author is required to confirm that the  work is original,  has not been previously published, is solely submitted to this jounal and until making a decision should not be submitted elsewhere. The only exception to this requirement applies to conference papers. 

To us, only person who meet the following criteria may be listed as an author of a submitted manuscript as he/she is morally obligated to take responsibility for its content:

1. the one  who has made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition or analysis or interpretation of the study;

2.  the one who has drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and

3.  the one who has seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and has agreed to its submission for publication. The person who has provided technical help, writing and editing assistance and general support should be recognized in the  section of the “Acknowledgements” , provided that they have consented to be named. The corresponding author should see to it that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript before its submission to the journal for publication.

An author is expected to disclose the identity of the institution where the research was carried out or funded. He/she should also reveal the institutional affiliations of the author or co-authors.

Plagiarism is a cardinal sin in publishing for which this  journal has a zero tolerance. Authors are forbidden to borrow another person’s ideas, text, data, illustrations, mathematical results, computer code, methodology or other material, including materials garnered from lectures, conference presentations, whether published or unpublished, without explicit acknowledgement. Self-plagiarism, in the form of recycled publication, is equally frowned upon.

Dual publications is refered  to duplicate or redundant publications. They extend to self-plagiarism when a work is published more than once by the same author(s) without justification for overlap and approval from the original publication or without citating  the original source (Otherwise, the paper immediately is rejected). This applies even if the duplication is accomplished in a different language. However, preprint  of the research work on the author’s personal website or in a preprint archive will not be considered as duplicate publication.

Authors should present their works in accordance with templates for Journal of Mathematical Modeling (JMM).

Authors should ensure that their manuscript is their original works/researches, and also provides accurate data, underlying other's references.

Authors are accountable for their works' intelligibility and accuracy.

Note 1: Publishing a manuscript does not mean that JMM confirm their contents.

Authors should ensure that submitted articles have not been replicated or ‎published, elsewhere.

 Authors are in charge to have others permission for an accurate citation. While their direct speech are used, a quotation mark (“ ”) is necessary.

Corresponding author should clearly mention complete information of all co-authors.                    

 Note 2: Authors are asked to do not omit the statement of “Ghost Authorship”. And also do not write the statement of “Gift Authorship”

 Author in charge has the responsibility for the priorities of co-authors after their approval.

Authors are asked to prepare, keep, and stash raw data up to one year after publication, in order to be able to answer journal audiences' questions, if there are any.

 Paper submission means that all of the authors are pleased to whole financial and local supports, and have reported all of them.

Authors have the responsibility for any error or fallaciousness of the manuscript. In this case, they should inform journal's authorities, instantly.

 

  3. Research and publication misconduct

Authors are advised to do not misconduct in research and publication. If some cases of research and publication misconduct come to pass during the following steps;

Submission, review, edition, or publication, JMM has the right to legal action. The cases are listed as below:

Fabrication: is a kind of inventing data or results and reporting them as an original research. Both of these misconducts are unacceptable or improper behavior and seriously alter the integrity of research. Therefore, articles must be written based on original data and use of counterfeit or fabricated data is strongly prohibited.

Falsification: occurs when someone changes or alternates research materials, data, equipment or procedures, such that the results of the research are no longer accurately reflected in the research record

Plagiarism: means to take someone else's achievements or even citations without any acknowledgment or explanation of the producer.

Wrongful Appropriation: It happens when an author takes a person's achievements and by manipulating some parts and a little change, submits it with his/ her name.

False Attribution: It occurs when a person is listed as an author, while she/ he hasn't had any role in the research.

 

4. Reviewers' responsibility

Reviewers are urged to avoid any potential conflict of interest before agreeing to undertake the responsibility of reviewing, specifically, that the reviewer not be in direct competition with the author or authors, and that no personal relationship exists between the review and author(s), including any institutional affiliations or exploitable commercial relationship.

For obvious reasons, reviewers’ names are kept strictly confidential. Their identities may only be disclosed to our Editorial Board members who likewise are obligated to maintain confidentiality.  Information and ideas obtained while acting in the reviewer’s role must be kept confidential and not used for unfair competitive advantage. Unless the papers have been published, the reviewers are asked not to discuss their content with colleagues or third parties.

It is our policy that we never guarantee acceptance of manuscript for publication, nor for that matter, do we promise unrealistically short review times. The safeguarding of quality is a laborious process and should not be rushed, for any reason.

Given that the reviewing process plays an important part in deciding whether a manuscript is published, reviewers are expected to be timely, objective, honest and fair with their judgments, in such a way that authors can understand the basis of their criticisms or comments. As experts in the field, they are in a good position to detect plagiarism or self-plagiarism or dual publication. We expect them to stand sentinel in the early stages of the publishing process.

To read the manuscript carefully, and pay attention to scientific material, contextual, and Qualitative, and do their best to improve articles' quality and content.

Let editor-in-chief to know their comments on the manuscript, declare acceptance or rejection of the article. In the case of rejection they should introduce another reviewers.

In acceptance or rejection of an articles they shouldn't consider Personal relationships, the benefits of an organization, or a company.

They should not accept to review any article which has been involved in its writing or analyze.

Review must be accomplish based on scientific documents and any self, professional, religious and racial opinion is not acceptable

The reviewing should be accomplished accurate. Strengths and weaknesses of the article should be announced clearly, educational and constructive method.

Do not rewrite and correct any manuscript according to your interest.

Take care of accurate citations. Also be sure to reminisce the cases which haven't been cited in the related published researches.

Avoid of reveal the information and contents of articles.

Reviewers are not allowed to criticize authors for what they have presented, or disclose if there are some weaknesses in the author's research. Reviewers must not to take new data or contents for personal researches.

When the article is published, reviewers should not present any more comments.

Reviewers should not pass an article, to another person, to review, except when the editor-in-chief is informed. Reviewer and co-reviewer's identification should be mentioned in each article's documents.

Reviewer is better not to communicate directly with none of author(s).

If any communication is necessary, it should be made through the editorial office.

Trying to report “research and publication misconduct” and submitting the related documents to editor-in-chief.

 

5. Editorial board responsibilities

The first simple duty of an editor is to see that there is no undue delay in publishing a submission, as this will adversely affect the career of the author as well as the reputation of the journal. Timeliness of publication and editorial independence are very important for us. We support the editorial independence and expert decision-making of our editorial board.

In the case that any editorial decision is subject to ethical or challenge, this process will be done fully transparent and in complete compliance with COPE principles and guidelines.

Another cardinal principle governs the editorial process, the overarching tenet of non-discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, color, creed, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship or nationality, disability or political affiliation.

In terms of process, manuscripts submitted to the journal are first reviewed by our editorial board. If they determine that it is suitable for publication, they may refer it to one ore more external reviewers whose independent report and assessment will inform the editors’ decisions. The editor’s decisions are to some extent appealable, provided that there is new relevant information or if there is alleged failure to follow our journal’s own publishing ethics.

The ethical rules for the reviewer are also applied to the editor, i.e., the avoidance of conflict of interest (including encouraging authors to cite the editor’s own publications), and being objective with a double blind critical process.  But in addition to the ethical obligations of the reviewer, the editor has two other important duties: to only consider publishing papers that bring new ideas or add valuable contributions to the advance of the discipline concerned.

The Editor-in-Chief of the journal has an obligation to thoroughly investigate any complaint or allegations of publishing misconduct.  In the case of the detection of violations of publishing ethics, our publisher or editors will initiate a process that complies in full with COPE guidelines covering publishing misconduct.  This policy on intellectual property is clearly posted out on the journal's  website.

The main aims of editorial board are preserving and the quality betterment of the journal.

Editorial board should to recommend the journal to international scientific, research communities, and other universities. And consider on publication priority, articles submitted from such an associations.

Editorial board should not have any personal publishing quota, in the journal. And their personal article publishing should not exceed.

Editorial board should consider the reviewers' comments, in accepting or rejecting any article.

Editorial board should be well-known experts, having published many Valuable articles. Should to be answerable, believed in professional ethics, and try to improve journal aims.

Editorial board should supply a database of experts and suitable reviewers for journal, and update the list of experts regularly.

Editorial board should try to invite qualified moral, experienced and well-known reviewers to cooperate with their journal.

Editorial board ought to identify and acknowledge, profound, and reasonable reviews.

They should not accept superficial and poor reviews, and also prohibit one-sided and contemptuous reviews.

The whole documents of reviewing should be archived as scientific documents. And reviewer's name and affiliation must be confidentially kept, by editorial board.

Editorial board must send whole reviewing documents to corresponding author, as soon as possible

Editorial board should keep the contents of the article and do not divulge article's information to anyone.

Editorial board must prevent any contrast of benefits because of personal commercial, academic or financial relations which may causes accepting or rejecting an article.

Editor-in-chief should inspect all types of research and publication misconduct, which reviewers report in such a way that seems serious.

If there are some research or publication misconduct, editor-in-chief has to delete it immediately and all indexing databases and audiences should be informed.

In the case of any publication research misconduct, editorial board should take the responsibility and publish corrected article in the next issue.

Editorial board should appreciate any audiences' new ideas, since regarding these suggestions causes the publication policies, structure and quality of articles be  ameliorated.

 

6. Publishers

      For most journals, the editorial board does not itself oversee the production and business processes. These are usually carried out by a commercial publisher, a professional organization, university, or other institution.  The support publishers receive from authors, editors, and referees in the mathematical community carries with it responsibilities.  Most important is a commitment to the mathematical literature and its dissemination.  Publishers must also adhere to the principles of integrity, transparency, and timeliness.  Detailed information concerning the journal, including  editorial board members, journal vision and scope, submission and publication procedures, fees, page charges, subscription pricing, etc., must be made publicly available to all concerned parties.

      Publishers should ensure that papers are widely accessible, affordable in all parts of the world, and permanently archived in a form that can be readily located, referenced, and (possibly after paying a reasonable fee) accessed.  Sales arrangements should be flexible, allowing, for instance, the purchase of individual journals and articles.   Alternative modes of financing the publication process, such as through author fees, submission fees, page charges, or combinations of these create significant ethical challenges.  First, the opportunity to publish in a peer-reviewed venue should be available to all, subject to scientific merit, not the ability to pay via research grants, institutional support or other means. Therefore there should be methods to opt out of payment when needed.  Second, payment in direct return for publication creates a potential conflict of interest with the peer-review process.  For this reason, any such journal requires clear, well-defined, effective processes to insulate peer review and editorial decision-making from monetary considerations.

     Accepted papers should be typeset, copyedited (if appropriate), and published online and/or in print in a timely manner.  Publishers should establish and clearly communicate to potential authors their policies concerning copyright and authors’ web posting.  Publishers should track and publish the date of submission, final revised submission, if applicable, and date of publication (electronic and/or print) of published papers.   Publishers should respond to and investigate allegations of plagiarism or other unethical behavior connected with their journals, publish a clear and specific retraction in confirmed cases, and   protect the rights of authors by seeking appropriate redress for plagiarism and unauthorized use of their work.