The publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal is an essential model for our journal " Roa Iktissadia Review".
In order to provide our readers with a journal of highest quality, we state the following principles of Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement.
Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.
It is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parts involved in the act of publishing: Editors, authors, and reviewers.
" Roa Iktissadia Review" is fully committed to good publication practice and assumes the task of fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities.
DUTIES OF THE EDITOR
- Publication decisions: The Editor-in-Chief of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor may be guided by the editorial policies of the journal, and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may confer with the members of the Editorial Board or reviewers in making this decision.
- Fair Review: The Editor-in-Chief ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- Confidentiality: The Editor-in-Chief, the members of the Editorial Board and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors of the manuscript, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
- Disclosure and conflicts of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the research of the Editor-in-Chief or that of the members of the Editorial Board without the expressed written consent of the author.
DUTIES OF REVIEWERS
- Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
- Promptness: A selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to review the paper.
- Confidentiality: The manuscripts received for review will be treated as confidential documents. They will not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
- Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should attempt to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that a result or argument has 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 paper 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 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.
DUTIES OF AUTHORS
- Reporting standards: Authors should accurately present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance with the submission guidelines of the review. Authors are also responsible for language editing before submitting the article. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. 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 that the work and/or words of others have been appropriately cited or quoted if the authors have used them. Roa Iktissadia Review reserves the right to use plagiarism detecting software to screen submitted papers at all the times.
- Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or conference. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper and must provide it for editorial review upon request of the Editor-in-Chief.
- 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 interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
- Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Any work or words of other authors, contributors, or sources should be appropriately credited and referenced.
- Fundamental 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 promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.