All Page Of Iranian Evolutionary Educational Psychology Journal

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

 Publication of an article in an academic peer-reviewed journal serves several functions, one of which is to validate and preserve the “minutes” of research. It is therefore of immense importance that these “minutes” are accurate and trustworthy. The act of publishing involves many parties, each of which plays an important role in achieving these aims. It therefore follows that the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, the publisher and the owner of Society-owned journals have responsibilities to meet expected ethical standards at all stages in their involvement from submission to publication of an article. 

Iranian Evolutionary Educational Psychology Journal is committed to meeting and upholding standards of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. We follow closely the industry associations, such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) that set standards and provide guidelines for best practices in order to meet these requirements. Below is a summary of our key expectations of editors, peer-reviewers and authors.

Also to avoid plagiarism in published articles this journal use the iThenticate software that analyses the manuscripts and report the rate of plagiarism in percent. As a rule if a manuscript has the plagiarism more than 30% the author have to rephrase and para-phrase the suspected sentences. If the plagiarism rate exceed more than 60% the manuscript will be rejected without external review.

  1. ETHICAL EXPECTATIONS

Publication and authorship

  1. All submitted manuscripts to the HPR are subject to strict peer-review process by at least three reviewers that are experts in the area of applied biotechnology.
  2. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
  3. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  4. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  5. Rejected manuscripts will not be re-reviewed.
  6. The manuscript acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  7. No research can be included in more than one publication.

Authors responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  4. Authors must participate in the peer review process.
  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  8. Authors must notify the editors of any conflicts of interest.
  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the editors.

Reviewers responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author
  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
  4. Reviewers should identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Reviewers should also call to the editor- in-chiefs attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  6. Reviewers should not review 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 papers.

Editors responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  6. Editors should have a clear picture of a researchs funding sources.
  7. Editors should base their decisions solely on the papers importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publications scope.
  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest among staff, authors, reviewers and board members.
  1. PROCEDURES FOR DEALING WITH UNETHICAL BEHAVIOUR

 Identification of unethical behavior

Misconduct and unethical behavior may be identified and brought to the attention of the editor and publisher at any time, by anyone.

Misconduct and unethical behavior may include, but need not be limited to, examples as outlined above.

Whoever informs the editor or publisher of such conduct should provide sufficient information and evidence in order for an investigation to be initiated. All allegations should be taken seriously and treated in the same way, until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

PUBLISHING ETHICS ISSUES

  1. All editorial members, reviewers and authors must confirm and obey rules defined by COPE.
  2. The corresponding author is the main owner of the article so she/he can withdraw the article when it is incomplete (before entering the review process or when a revision is asked for).
  3. The authors cannot make major changes in the article after acceptance without a serious reason.
  4. All editorial members and authors must will to publish any kind of corrections honestly and completely.
  5. Any notes of plagiarism, fraudulent data or any other kinds of fraud must be reported completely to COPE.

 Ethical Considerations for Human Subjects

Human subjects

Authors reporting experimental studies on human subjects must include a statement of assurance in the Patients and Methods section of the manuscript reading that. The project was done with consideration of ethical issues and obtaining license from the ethics of their local committee and obtaining the written consent of participants. Also, it was done according to ethical standards of human experimentation in accordance to the Helsinki Declaration (www.cirp.org/library/ethics/helsinki ).

Informed Consent

In the case of research on human subjects, informed consent and other ethical considerations should be mentioned in the "methods" section of the manuscript. The author should include a statement that informed consent was obtained for any experimentation with human subjects.

Conflict of Interest: The authors must declare any conflict of interests of contributed authors very briefly in a separate paragraph at the end of the paper. All sources of funding should be declared; unless otherwise the following sentence should be given “Authors declare no conflict of interests”.

To prevent the information on potential conflict of interest for authors from being overlooked or misplaced, mention this information in the cover letter. Authors must identify any potential financial conflicts of interest before the review process begins. Declared conflict of interest will not automatically result in rejection of paper, but the editors reserve the right to publish any declared conflict of interest alongside accepted. The following would generally be regarded as potential conflicts of interest:

  1. Direct financial payment to an author for the research or manuscript produced by the sponsor of a product or service evaluated in an article.
  2. Ownership of shares by an author in the company sponsoring a product service evaluated in an article (or in a company sponsoring a competing product).
  3. Personal consultant for companies or other organizations with a financial interest in the promotion of particular health care products and services.

Source of Funding: Authors are required to specify the source of funding for their research when submitting a paper. Suppliers of materials should be named and their location (town, state/county, country) included. The information will be disclosed in the Acknowledgements section of the published article.

Copyright Assignment: If your paper is accepted, the author identified as the formal corresponding author of the paper, the corresponding author should study and accept the copyright statement that is available on the journal website.

Acknowledgement: Authors should acknowledge any scientific, technical, statistical and financial supports. Contributors other than coauthors may be very briefly acknowledged in a separate paragraph at the end of the paper. All sources of funding should be declared. 

3

Send Message

 
   
Name:  
Family:  
Mobile:  
Text:  
 
Captcha:  
   
 
L