Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the
author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is
necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics
statements for The Rubrics Journal are based on the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and
the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers. If the stakeholders, authors,
editors or reviewers need any clarification about the bellow statement they
should refer to original COPE guidelines documents.
Duties of the Editors-in-Chief
Fair play
Submitted manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual
content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief,
ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality
The Editor-in-Chief and any editorial staff must not
disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the
corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers,
and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript
must not be used in an Editor's own research without the explicit written
consent of the author(s).
Publication decisions
The handling Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible
for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The
Editor-in-Chief may be guided by the policies of the journal's Editorial Board
and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding
libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may confer
with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Duties of peer reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review assists the
Editor-in-Chief in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial
communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the
manuscript.
Promptness
Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the
research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be
impossible should immediately notify the Editor-in-Chief so that alternative
reviewers can be contacted.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as
confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others
except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism
of the author is inacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with
appropriate supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has
not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation,
or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant
citation. A reviewer should also call to the Editor's attention any substantial
similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other
published data of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review
must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should
not consider evaluating 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 submission.
Duties of authors
Reporting standards
Authors reporting results of original research should
present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective
discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented
accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and
references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly
inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely
original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others
that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Multiple, redundant or
concurrent publication an author should not in general publish manuscripts
describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary
publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one
journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be
given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in
determining the nature of the reported work.
Authorship of a manuscript
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a
significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or
interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant
contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have
participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they
should be named in an Acknowledgement section.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate
co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors
are included in the author list of the manuscript, and 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 should disclose in their manuscript any
financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to
influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of
financial support for the project should be disclosed.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy
in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify
the journal’s Editor-in-Chief or publisher and cooperate with them to either
retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.
Publisher’s confirmation
In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct,
fraudulent publication or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with
the Editors-in-Chief, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the
situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt
publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction
of the affected work.
The Publisher and the Journal do not discriminate on the
basis of age, color, religion, creed, disability, marital status, veteran
status, national origin, race, gender, genetic predisposition or carrier
status, or sexual orientation in its publishing programs, services and
activities.
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and
preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with
organizations and maintaining our own digital archive.
