Research Ethics

  • Ethical Guidelines for Researchers:

Researchers are required to adhere to the following conditions when submitting a research paper for publication in the journal:

  • The research must be original and contribute to society by offering solutions to current problems and challenges.
  • The research must not be part of a thesis or any other study previously conducted by the researcher.
  • The research must not have been published previously in any scientific journal, book, or other publication.
  • Once the journal receives the research paper, the researcher must not submit it to any other journal or publisher. If the researcher wishes to submit it elsewhere, they must inform the journal in advance. Republishing the paper after it has been published in the journal is strictly prohibited.
  • The journal accepts collaborative research papers, provided that written consent from all co-authors is included for publication in the journal.
  • Researchers must maintain academic integrity by acknowledging the sources of all ideas and information used in their research.
  • Researchers must adhere to established research methodologies, including clearly stating all essential elements in the introduction, explaining the research problem, ensuring a logical flow of ideas throughout the paper, and presenting accurate and clear results and recommendations.
  • Researchers must use current and diverse sources in their research, relevant to the topic.
  • Researchers must adhere to the journal's formatting and style guidelines.

 

  • Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers:
  • Reviewers are obligated to perform their review duties with honesty and objectivity.
  • Any reviewer whose expertise does not cover the subject matter of the submitted research, or who is unable to review the submitted research, must inform the editor-in-chief and withdraw from the review process.
  • Reviewers must not use any information or data obtained from the research they are reviewing for their own personal benefit.
  • Reviewers must inform the editor-in-chief of any significant similarity or overlap between the research being reviewed and any other published work they are aware of.
  • The reviewer is obligated to conduct the review process with complete confidentiality, without contacting the researcher or any other party. This does not preclude discussing some of the ideas in the research under review with other academics or specialists, in order to reach a fair and objective assessment.
  • The reviewer must ensure that their comments and the review report are clear and precise, so that the researcher can easily understand the intended meaning of the comments.
  • The reviewer is obligated to submit the review report by the deadline set by the journal.

 

  • Ethical Standards for the Editorial Board:

The editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board are obligated to perform their duties with integrity. This means they must adhere to the following:

  • They must not discriminate between researchers and must provide an opportunity for publication to any researcher who wishes to publish in the journal, whether from inside or outside the country, provided they adhere to the ethical standards and guidelines for scientific publication.
  • Publication priority should be given to the earliest submitted manuscript, unless the editorial board deems that a particular research paper should be prioritized due to its importance and its addressing a significant and timely societal issue.
  • Confidentiality regarding information related to research papers submitted for review by the journal must be maintained throughout the review process. The researcher will be notified of the review outcome officially. 

Furthermore, maintaining confidentiality regarding the reviewers' opinions and refraining from sharing this information with any other party after the publication decision is made is mandatory, except in cases of plagiarism or intellectual property infringement, where legal procedures will be followed.

  • The editorial board has the right, if not satisfied with the reviewer's recommendation (positive or negative), to refer the paper to a third reviewer.