COPE’s Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing Flowcharts Retraction Policy...
Category - Policy
COPE’s Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers
Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
Flowcharts
Retraction Policy
Plagiarism Detection
Establish the policies necessary to help the editorial process of journal Editors, especially those related to the independence of Editors, research ethics, authorship, transparency and integrity, peer review process, role of editorial team, appeals and complains; Publicize the journal policies to all the parties involved in the editorial process; Assess and revise the journal policies regularly to include potential new developments and recommendations...
The Reviewer has an important role of assisting the Editors in making editorial decisions and the Author in improving his/her/their paper.
COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
COPE Flowchart: What to do if editors suspect a reviewer has appropriated an author’s idea or data
Reviews should be conducted objectively and the referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with other people.
The Reviewer is expected to provide their review of the article in a timeframe of 1-2 months. If any selected referee will not be able to comply to this rule, he/she should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
The Reviewer has an important role of assisting the Editors in making editorial decisions and the Author in improving his/her/their paper.
Read How to handle authorship disputes: a guide for new researchers on the COPE website
In general, Expert Journals recommend that authors, who seek to publish private information and images of individuals, should obtain the individual’s explicit consent in order to avoid privacy issues.
