Ethical Norms for Publication

The Journal "AiBi, Journal of Research, Management and Engineering" promotes good practices based on ethical standards of publication among all contributors, following the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Publication Ethical Guidelines of Academy Publisher and Elsevier. the Publication Ethical Guidelines of Academy Publisher and Elsevier. Therefore, we promote maximum rigor in the course of the evaluation and publication process, following the fundamentals of exemplary ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication process: author, journal editor, reviewer and publisher. In Revista "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" all submitted articles are evaluated and published based on their merits and scientific contribution. Ensuring that best practices are followed at each step of the publication process. The journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" reviews manuscripts for plagiarism using the iThenticate: Plagiarism Detection Sofware tool. In addition, each article submitted for publication must fill out the originality form, the format of ethical principles for publication and comply with the following requirements:

  • Consent: all authors give their consent for the submission and publication of the article submitted for evaluation.
  • Authors' contribution: all authors contributed to the article without omission of any author, indicating the contribution of each author.
  • Originality of the work: the article submitted for review is original, has not been previously published and has not been submitted simultaneously for review in another journal.
  • Consent to reproduce a paper: the article does not include original material copied from other authors without their consent. In case the article contains material from other authors, their consent for printed and electronic reproduction must be clearly indicated.
  • Previous research: all the information included in the article submitted for review, which comes from previous studies, has been referenced. In case the submitted article is an analysis of a previously published proposal, it should always be cited.
  • Journal archives: the article submitted for review will be kept in the archives of "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" and will be considered a valid publication as long as it meets each of the above criteria.
  • Reviewing Committee: the members of the Reviewing Committee do not have any labor, academic, or personal relationship with the authors.

To access the entire Ethical Principles document download pdf and also described below.

1. ETHICAL PRINCIPLES IN SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES

  • Human rights, privacy and confidentiality: when necessary, authors should specify that they adhere to recognized standards, in order to minimize possible harm to participants, avoiding the use of coercion or exploitation, thus protecting confidentiality according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Similarly, when appropriate, researchers should openly communicate any information that may influence the willingness of the participant, such as, for example: sponsorship, the purpose of the study, the expected results, and the possible consequences of publication of the research.
  • Cultures and heritages: authors should not include any images of objects that could have cultural significance or could be interpreted as offensive, such as religious texts or historical events. Likewise, researchers should be careful not to include names or photographs of deceased persons when this is contraindicated in the culture.
  • Animal Research: research involving animals must adhere to the following guidelines: replacement - the use of alternative methods to animal involvement, Reduction (methods that reduce the number of animals to be used) and refinement (methods that improve animal welfare). Authors should report the study design, statistical analyses, experimental procedures applied and experimental animals used, steps followed in animal experimentation, characteristics of animal housing, and mating techniques employed. In addition, investigators should report the manner in which discomfort and pain were avoided and minimized, as well as confirm that the animals did not experience any unnecessary suffering during the study. Evidence of ethical and legal approval obtained by the institution endorsing the research should be included in the manuscript. Authors should declare whether the experiments were conducted in accordance with institutional and national ethical rules and regulations. Investigators from US institutions should adhere to the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the US National Research Council, the Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the US Public Health Service. Researchers from UK institutions should adhere to the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations (S1 2012/3039). European authors should cite Directive 2010/63/EU
  • Format for Reports: investigators should follow the latest edition of the IEEE editorial format to accurately report the results of the study, allowing readers to evaluate, replicate, and use them.

1.1. REPORTING OF RESEARCH RESULTS: researchers should not fabricate data. If the authors and/or the Editorial Committee discover significant errors in the published data, the necessary steps should be taken to publicly correct such errors.

1.2. RESEARCH INTEGRITY.

a) Misconduct: research misconduct refers to fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism when proposing, conducting, or reviewing research or when reporting research results. If the Editorial Committee suspects misconduct, it will request an investigation from the institution supporting the research, the employer, sponsor or the competent national agency.

b) Allegations of irregularities: allegations of irregularities in the research, made by identified persons or anonymously, will be investigated only if they are accompanied by the respective evidence.

c) Image fabrication/falsification and manipulation: sometimes it is necessary to edit images to reveal certain characteristics; however, inappropriate manipulation of images creates misleading results. Investigators should report when editing images. They should also follow the following recommendations: Specific characteristics should not be altered, original unsometimes it is necessary to edit images to reveal certain features; however, inappropriate manipulation of images creates misleading results. Investigators should report when editing images. They should also consider the following recommendations: specific features should not be altered, original unpublished images should also be submitted when any modification is made to the image intended for publication. Adjustments to brightness or contrast can only be used when they are applied equally to the entire image and do not distort the meaning of the image, excessive editing to emphasize one size of the image is not appropriate, if any part of a recording or non-linear adjustments are deleted, it should be noted in the figure legend, figures should not be constructed from different components; however, if the author considers it necessary, then it should be clearly indicated by dividing lines in the figure and in the legend.

d) Plagiarism: plagiarism is the copying or misuse of another person's intellectual property. Researchers should not present as their own parts of other papers or data. The journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" reviews manuscripts to detect plagiarism.

e) Duplicate and redundant publication of data: researchers should avoid publishing data that have been previously published, as originals. This does not preclude republishing or republishing data as long as they are accompanied by proper acknowledgement. The following prior publications are not considered duplicate publications: abstracts and posters presented at conferences, results presented at scientific meetings, results in databases that have not been interpreted, as well as dissertations and theses in university archives.

f) Text recycling: partial results of a previous publication that are addressed to a different audience are allowed when the discussion and conclusion are different.

g) Double submission: authors may not submit a manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. If the Editorial Committee becomes aware of such a situation, the manuscript will not be considered for publication.

h) Duplicating information published in other languages: translations of manuscripts already published will not be considered for publication.

i) Penalties: sanctions are applied consistently after careful consideration. In the first instance, a retraction will be issued. In the most serious circumstances, the institution from which the author(s) originates will be notified, and the Journal will decline to consider the future work of the author(s) involved.

1.3 EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND PROCESSES.

a) authorship: the list of authors and their sequential order should appropriately reflect the scientific or professional contributions of the researchers involved. All authors of the manuscript should sign an authorization form, indicating their level of participation in the study. Additional contributions that do not meet the authorship criteria should be listed in an acknowledgement section with the permission of the authors. All required administrative requirements must be fulfilled (minutes of approval by the Institutional Ethics Committee). All correspondence should be copied to all authors contributing to the article. Who is an author? *Whoever has participated in the collection, cleaning, standardization or the application of mathematical, statistical or computational techniques for the analysis or interpretation of the research data, as well as the performance of experiments for the validation of the reproducibility of the data and results; * Whoever has contributed in the conception of the idea, participated in the design, planning, execution, supervision of the research work or in the critical review of its intellectual content: * Who has been involved in the drafting, revision, approval of the final version, including pre- and post-publication stages; * Who has criteria to answer and support each of the scientific aspects of the article and the research; * Who has contributed in the provision of materials, inputs, tools or obtaining financial resources for the development and publication of the work. It is the responsibility of the authors to determine that all persons listed as authors meet the four criteria. In case of a request to remove or add an author after submission or publication of the manuscript, the journal editors should request an explanation and a signed statement of agreement for the requested change from all authors already mentioned, including the one to be removed or added. In the case of collaborators who are not authors, they must authorize in writing that their names appear in the publication. Their contributions must be specified (e.g., as scientific advisors, critical reviewers of the study proposal, data collection, having contributed to providing participants or having cared for patients included in the study, having participated in the writing of the article or in its technical editing).

b) Authorship: If the Editorial Committee suspects authorship problems, it will contact the corresponding author to request further information. If further information is needed, other authors will be contacted.

c) Funding: all sources of funding, as well as their specific roles, should be listed in the acknowledgements section. If there is no source of funding, this should be explicitly stated. Other sources of funding, such as editorial assistance, should also be specified.

d) Peer Reviews: the Journal uses double-blind peer review of articles. Only the editorial section does not undergo peer review. All submitted articles are treated with the appropriate confidentiality. Thus, peer reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest when responding to an invitation to review a manuscript, as well as when submitting the results of the review. In cases where there is a conflict of interest, such as when the reviewer has recently collaborated with the author at the same institution, or when he/she is in direct competition with the author, reviewers may not review the author's manuscript.

e) Times of publication: the Journal "AiBi, Journal of Research, Management and Engineering" strives to ensure timely peer review, avoiding unnecessary delays in the publication process.

f) Editors and Journal staff as authors: the editor and members of the Editorial Board and Advisory Board are not involved in any decisions about their own articles submitted to the Journal. Accordingly, a brief statement will be provided detailing the process that will be used to make the editorial decision in cases where the editor or members of the Editorial or Advisory Boards are authors of a publication.

g) Conflict of interest: editors, authors, and reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest that could affect their ability to submit or review a manuscript objectively. Conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, financial, personal, political, or religious interests. Authors should describe relevant funding, including the purposes of such funding, as well as any corresponding patents, stocks and shares held.

h) Libel and slander: the Advisory Committee monitors manuscripts and peer review reports to identify language that may be considered defamatory or negligently made misrepresentations, which may lead to legal action. Such language should not be used, and the author of such expressions assumes full responsibility.

i) Editorial independence and commercial issues: the Universidad de Santander - UDES is in charge of the financing and edition of the Journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería"; however, this does not imply that this institution influences in any way the editorial decisions.

j) Academic Debate: "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" encourages correspondence and constructive criticism of published works. When a correspondence discusses a specific article, the author will be invited to respond before the correspondence is published. When possible, the correspondence and the author's response will be published together. Authors may indicate whether they consider a correspondence to be constructive, but are not empowered to veto comments.

k) Appeals: authors who disagree with the editorial feedback may file an appeal against the decision made by the Editorial Board. Appeals will overturn previous decisions only when new information becomes available, so reversals of decisions will not be made without new evidence. The Editorial Committee may seek comments from additional reviewers in order to make a decision.

l) Corrections: readers and authors should notify the Journal "AiBi, Journal of Research, Management and Engineering" if there are errors in a publication, especially those that could affect the interpretation of the data. Corrections will be published and, when major errors are found that could invalidate the paper, a retraction will be considered for publication. All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of errors, in case of detection.

m) Retractions and expressions of concern: the AiBi Journal conforms to the recommendations issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to deal with errata and retractions arising from scientific malpractice, in order to promote scientific integrity and the communication of science in those circumstances that have not been identified in the manuscript editing process. Retractions are published when the errors reported may affect the interpretation of the data, as well as when the information presented in the paper is fraudulent, or in cases of serious ethical misconduct.

  • In the case of errata, the original document is maintained and the correction is recorded at the end of the text with reference to the document that published the erratum.

  • In the case of retractions, the original document is replaced by another one indicating the reasons for the withdrawal and the document being retracted is indicated.

n) Withdrawal of articles: the removal, deletion or concealment of an article is only permitted when there is a case involving legal violations, defamation, or other limitations of a legal nature, as well as when there is false or inaccurate data. In such cases, a statement of withdrawal will be published.

o) Data protection legislation: the Journal "AiBi, Journal of Research, Management and Engineering" complies with data protection legislation.

1.4. COPYRIGHT AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY.

a) The published articles are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Editorial Board.

b) Authors submitting papers to the journal must inform that the document is unpublished (original) and has not been previously published (pdf of the format).

c) Intellectual property protection. Exclusive License Agreement: The original author retains the moral rights over his/her article, but the journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" reserves the economic rights for publication, which is formalized through the signing of a copyright agreement prior to publication (pdf of the format). (pdf of the format).

d) The journal is guided by international standards on intellectual property and copyright, and in particular by Article 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law 23 of 1982 and Law 1915 of 2018.

1.5. SOCIALIZATION OF DATA FOR VERIFICATION. Researchers should share their database with other competent professionals who seek to verify their results after publication. The data provided will maintain the confidentiality of the participants and will protect the legal rights of authorship with respect to the study. Authors may request coverage of the costs of providing the information. When investigators are asked to share their data for reanalysis, the use of this data will be exclusively for the stated purpose. Researchers must receive written agreement from the authors for use of the data for any other purpose.

1.6. PEER REVIEWERS. Researchers reviewing material submitted for presentations, publications, research proposals, or grants must respect the confidentiality and proprietary rights of those who submitted the information.

1.7. STORAGE AND SHARING OF DATA AND DOCUMENTATION. The Journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" encourages authors to share data and other media that support the results of the work by archiving them in an appropriate public repository. Authors should include a data accessibility statement, including a link to the repository they have used, so that this statement can be published along with their work. Authors can consult the global registry of research data repositories at orrg to help them identify registered and certified repositories relevant to their subject areas. It is recommended to exclude data that may compromise the privacy or security of those involved in the research or any legal or ethical circumstances. The deposit should be made before or at the time of submission of the article to the journal; this information should not be in the article, but should be integrated in the cover letter addressed to the journal in the comments to the editor to ensure the evaluation of the article under the double-blind system. Data Citation in recognition of the importance of data as a product of a research effort, the Journal "AiBi, Journal of Research, Management and Engineering" has endorsed FORCE11 Data Citation Principles and is implementing a data citation policy. Journal policies should require that data be cited in the same manner as article, book and web citations and authors should include data citations as part of their reference list. Data citation should be appropriate for data found within institutional, subject-focused, or more general data repositories. It is not intended to replace community standards, such as the online citation of GenBank Access Codes. When citing or making claims based on data, authors should refer to the data in the relevant place in the text of the manuscript and, in addition, provide a formal citation in the reference list. We recommend the format proposed by the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles Authors. Title of the dataset. Year; Repository or data archive: Version (if any). Persistent identifier (e.g, DOI).

1.8 ETHICAL OVERSIGHT POLICY

The Editorial Committee of the journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" seeks to:

  • Guarantee the confidentiality of all contributions received, whether they are published or discarded after the evaluation process, as well as the anonymity of authors and evaluators at all times.
  • Review compliance with all ethical and editorial criteria of the contributions submitted, especially in relation to the verification of plagiarism, manipulation of citations and falsification/fabrication of data, among others, as a condition for the start of the evaluation process. In any case, authors should be informed promptly and clearly about any decision taken or request the corresponding clarifications when the situation warrants it.
  • Initiate in a timely manner the process of searching for peer reviewers, guaranteeing the ethical and scientific suitability of the reviewers assigned for each article according to their academic trajectories and publications in relation to the subject matter, taking into consideration the suggestions of the authors, as long as this does not represent any conflict of interest.
  • To effectively process all complaints, claims or suspicions of fraud, plagiarism, anti-plagiarism or any other conduct that goes against the ethical guidelines subscribed by the Journal.
  • Resolve the concerns of authors and evaluators in a timely and appropriate manner, publish retractions and errata when necessary, and make the corresponding adjustments in the files published in digital format in cases where inaccuracies or errors have been made in the published information.
  • To keep authors informed of all developments that arise in the course of the editorial process, especially when there are complaints, claims or suspicions of editorial conduct contrary to the Journal's ethical policy.
  • To grant conditions of equality and impartiality for the treatment of all contributions received, regardless of personal or institutional affinity between the authors and the members of the Journal's editorial team.

1.9. TREATMENT OF COMPLAINTS, DENUNCIATIONS AND APPEALS.

The Journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" is open to the reception of reports, complaints and appeals through the e-mail editor_aibi@cucuta.udes.edu.co, which will be received by the Editor-in-Chief and will be handled by the Editorial Committee, guaranteeing the anonymity of the complainant. It is recommended that alleged misconduct be reported by:

  • Anyone connected with research, in any role.

  • Anyone in a supervisory, administrative or scientific editing role.

  • On suspicions of research misconduct, including self-reporting.

The Journal maintains strict control over compliance with editorial ethics, as well as with the assessments indicated by external evaluators. In response to this and in accordance with what is established in COPE, the protocol that coincides with the alleged misconduct investigated is followed, which in general terms implies:

  • Detection of the violation and communication to the author.
  • Informing the Editorial Committee and the Scientific Committee of the receipt of a complaint through the usual channels of the journal (e-mails).
  • Elaboration of a report by the Editorial Committee.
  • Urgent meeting between the members of the Scientific and Editorial Committees, in which the case will be evaluated and the measures to be taken will be considered.
  • A final decision will be made taking into account all parties involved. In case the situation to be studied involves any of the members of the team or the Editorial Committee, the person will be removed from the process until its completion.

In the event that the claims directly affect the rights of editors and authors, compliance with the rules of publication and other rights and obligations, they will be handled directly by the Deputy Editor, in conjunction with the legal advisors of the University of Santander. For any questions, please send your communications to editor_aibi@cucuta.udes.edu.co.

The editors will be responsible for applying the measures dictated by the Committee. If the article is found to be unethical, it will receive a sanction that can be Errata, Corrigendum or Retraction. In its maximum degree it will be rejected and if already published, the article will be withdrawn from publication and a retraction will be made. Consequently, the author will not be able to publish again in the Journal and the fault will be communicated to his/her direct superior.

1.10. POST-PRINT PUBLICATION

The AiBi Journal accepts "post-print" publication in repositories and websites if it is done without generating derivative works and not for profit, citing the source and authorship respectively. Likewise, the Journal makes articles available to the scientific community in third-party repositories and national and international indexes.

2. OBLIGATIONS OF THE AUTHORS

  • Sources of information. The authors of empirical articles should present the procedures and calculations in the articles. All data should be explicitly stated in the article along with their details and sources to ensure the possibility of replication in future research. Inaccurate or fraudulent calculations provided in research articles are considered a violation of the code of ethics as it is not an acceptable practice in scientific publications.
  • Originality and plagiarism. Authors, collaborators and sources of information used in the preparation of your research articles should be properly cited. Plagiarism manifests itself in a variety of ways, such as using articles by another author as one's own articles, intentional or unintentional copying, paraphrasing parts of another's article without citation, or claiming results of research carried out by others. Plagiarism is unethical behavior and publication is unacceptable.
  • Redundant or concurrent publication. Authors should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical behavior and publication is unacceptable. Authors should not submit a previously published article to another journal for consideration.
  • Acknowledgment of sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in the development of their article. Information obtained privately, such as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with others, should not be used unless prior written permission is sought from the source. Information obtained confidentially, such as refereed manuscripts or grant applications, should not be used without explicit permission and must be in writing from the author of the work.
  • Authorship of the document. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All persons who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. If there is another person who has participated in some substantive aspect of the research project, they should be listed in acknowledgements or listed as collaborators. The lead author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest. All authors must disclose in their manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All financial sources for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be named: employment, consulting, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent/registration applications and grants, and other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be made public at the earliest possible stage and should be disclosed to the Journal Editor in the cover letter when submitting the manuscript for evaluation.
  • Similarity Analysis. The journal "AiBi, Revista de Investigación, Administración e Ingeniería" reviews manuscripts for plagiarism using the iThenticate: Plagiarism Detection Software tool and checks that they are properly referenced.
  • Significant errors in published works. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author's obligation to immediately notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the article as soon as possible. If the Editor or publisher discovers through a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the author's obligation to retract as soon as possible, correct the article, or provide evidence to the publisher of the correction of the original document.

3. OBLIGATIONS OF PUBLISHERS

  • Publication decision. The Editor of a blind peer-reviewed Journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal should be published. The validation of the work and its importance to the community is the policy of the Journal's editorial board and limited by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editor's decisions are based on manuscript evaluation reports from reviewers or editorial board members.
  • Fair play. The Editor must evaluate manuscripts based on scientific content without distinction of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or political leanings of the authors. The double blind review system will be used to avoid bias in the manuscript evaluation process. In this type of review, the reviewers do not know the personal and professional identity of the author, just as the authors do not know the identity of the reviewer.
  • The Editor and any member of the editorial staff should not disclose any information about a manuscript submitted to the journal to anyone other than the authors, area editors assigned by the Editor, potential reviewers, reviewers, or other editorial advisors.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Unpublished material contributed in a manuscript submitted to the Journal should not be used for an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Insider information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e., should ask a co-editor, associate editor, or editorial board member to handle such a manuscript rather than review it themselves) from reviewing/editing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest, resulting from the submission of a paper they authored or from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or (possibly) institutions connected with such articles. Editors should require all contributors to disclose any competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are discovered after publication. If necessary, other appropriate measures, such as publication of a retraction, should be taken. It should be ensured that the blind peer review process for sponsored journal supplements is the same as that used for the main journal. Articles in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of scholarly merit and reader interest and not be influenced by commercial considerations.
  • Educate on editorial ethics. Provide education and advice on publishing ethics standards, particularly for early career researchers.
  • Peer review. Ensure that the peer review process is fair, impartial, and timely. Generally, research articles should be reviewed by at least two external, independent reviewers, and when necessary, the Editor should seek additional opinions. The Editor will select reviewers who have appropriate expertise in the relevant field and should follow best practices to avoid the selection of fraudulent reviewers. The Editor shall review all disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions of self-references made by reviewers to determine if there is any potential bias.
  • Vigilance over the published record. The Editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and evaluating reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, review, and editorial) in conjunction with the editorial board. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint(s), but may also include additional communications to relevant research institutions and agencies. The publisher should make appropriate use of the publisher's systems for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism. An Editor presented with compelling evidence of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange for the immediate publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction in the record, as appropriate.

4. OBLIGATIONS OF REVIEWERS

  • Contribution to editorial decisions. Blind peer review assists the Editor in making editorial decisions and communicating with the author through the Editor or editorial board can also assist the author in improving his or her article. Blind peer review is the system used in formal scholarly communication.
  • Timeliness. When a reviewer assigned for a review does not feel sufficiently qualified to conduct the review, knows that he or she will not be able to review within an adequate time frame or will be unable to do so, he or she should notify the editor and excuse himself or herself from the review process.
  • Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. It should not be given to or discussed with others, except as authorized by the Editorr.
  • Standards of objectivity. Reviews should be conducted in an objective manner. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly and well argued with supporting material if necessary.
  • Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should detect whether there are relevant published works related to the article they are reviewing that have not been cited by the authors. Any previously published assertion or argument should be accompanied by the corresponding citation. The reviewer should also alert the Editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which he or she is aware.
  • Disclosure and conflict of interest. Unpublished material contributed in a manuscript submitted to the Journal should not be used for a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review should be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not agree to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, other relationships or connections with any of the authors, funding companies or institutions or where the research was conducted,  promotion of the product or service related to the article.

REFERENCES